ArticleIl Giornale di chirurgia
Surgical drain after open or laparoscopic splenectomy: is it needed or contraindicated?
Article in Il Giornale di chirurgia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Drains After Trauma Splenectomy Associated with Organ Space Surgical Site Infections?Surgical infections · 2026Article
- [Splenic surgery in hematological diseases : Indications and surgical technique].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- The Role of Abdominal Drain Cultures in Managing Abdominal Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Futility of abdominal drain in elective laparoscopic splenectomy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Article
- Topical hemostasis in laparoscopic surgery.Il Giornale di chirurgiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Authors report their experience with the routine use of surgical drainage in a large series of splenectomies. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Benefits and risks related to surgical drains have been always discussed, with some surgeons in favor of them and skeptic others considering not physiological their use. After splenectomy, their use is also largely debated, especially because of susceptibility of operated patients to infections. PATIENTS AND
methodsTwo thousand nine cases have been reviewed. Indications for splenectomy, performed either by open or laparoscopic approach, included idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura in 137 patients (65,4%), splenic lymphoma in 36 (17,2%), hereditary spherocytosis in 15 (7,4%), β-thalassemia in 8 (3,7%), other diseases in 13 (6,1%).
results"Active" or "passive" drains were placed in 80% and 20% of cases, respectively. Drains were removed 2-3 days after surgery in 90,2%, within 10 days in 4,3%, within 2 months in 0,4% of cases. In 2 cases a post-operative bleeding, detected through the drainage, required re-operation. One patient developed a subphrenic abscess, successfully treated by a percutaneous drainage. One case of pancreatic fistula was observed.
conclusionsIn Authors' experience, the use of drains after splenectomy does not affect the risk of subsequent infectious complications, independently on the type of the drainage system used. Early removal of drains in this series might have played an important role in the very low incidence of abdominal infections reported. The use of surgical drains after splenectomy might play an important role to early detect post-operative bleeding, as it happened in 2 cases of this series.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26188753PMC4511037W1021341371What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.