Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26188753›Full record

ArticleIl Giornale di chirurgia

Surgical drain after open or laparoscopic splenectomy: is it needed or contraindicated?

R Vecchio, E Intagliata, S Marchese, S Battaglia, R R Cacciola, E Cacciola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

R Vecchio
E Intagliata
S Marchese
S Battaglia
R R Cacciola
E Cacciola

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

LaparoscopySplenectomyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildContraindicationsDrainageFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative HemorrhagePostoperative PeriodRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26188753
PMCPMC4511037
OpenAlexW1021341371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.