Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2016
Closed suction drainage has no benefits in revision total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of the Need for Postoperative Drainage Application for Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Value of closed suction drainage in arthroscopic and minimally invasive surgery of the ankle joint: a prospective randomised study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Trial
- A prospective randomized study, use of closed suction drainage after revision hip arthroplasty may lead to excessive blood loss.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Does the use of a closed-suction drain reduce the effectiveness of an antibiotic-loaded spacer in two-stage exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic hip infection? A prospective, randomized, controlled study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Trial
- Closed suction drainage following routine primary total joint arthroplasty is associated with a higher transfusion rate and longer postoperative length of stay: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Trial
- Similar Short-Term Outcomes of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Surgery with or without Drainage: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Surgical drain has no benefits in hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Closed Suction Drainage May Not be Beneficial in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Suction Drain Tip Cultures in Predicting a Surgical Site Infection.Asian spine journal · 2023Article
- Article
- Effects of disusing closed suction drainage in simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty: A retrospective cohort study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Observational
- A comparison of the use and non-use of closed suction wound drainage in open reduction and internal fixation of femoral shaft fractures.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral studies have failed to show significant benefits of closed suction drainage (CSD) in routine primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, blood loss, haematoma formation and wound complications are generally much greater in revision THA as compared to primary THA. The purpose of this study was to determine if CSD is beneficial for revision THA patients.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial at our institution between July 2013 and July 2014. Eighty-eight patients undergoing revision THA were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive a CSD (n = 44) or to not receive a CSD (n = 44). All first-stage revision surgeries for infection were excluded. Primary outcomes were haemoglobin loss and number of patients transfused. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome evaluated with Harris hip score (HHS), pain evaluated with visual analogue scale (VAS), and length of hospital stay.
resultsThere were significantly more patients in the CSD group that required blood transfusions (20/44 as compared to 11/44, p = 0.04). Patients in the no CSD group were discharged earlier than patients in the CSD group (4.3 days as compared to 5.4 days, p = 0.002). No statistical significant difference was found in the HHS or pain VAS between the groups.
conclusionsThis study did not demonstrate any benefit with the use of CSD for revision THA with regard to wound related complications, infection or early functional outcome. Post-operative blood loss, transfusion rate, and length of hospital stay may be higher with CSD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.