ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2017
[Drainages in abdominal surgery: (in)dispensable?]
Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) society recommendations for liver surgery: a prospective, observational study.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2023Article
- Evaluation of an Integrated Smart Sensor System for Real-Time Characterization and Digitalization of Postoperative Abdominal Drain Output: A Pilot Study.Surgical innovation · 2022Article
- [Still no evidence for drains in bariatric surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProphylactic placement of intraperitoneal drains in elective abdominal surgery is still subject to scrutiny.
objectiveDo currently available data enable the practice of routine placement of abdominal drainages to be abandoned?
methodsThe databases of MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for clinical trials concerning the practice of routine drainage placement in elective abdominal surgery. The available evidence was summarized for cholecystectomy, colorectal surgery, gastrectomy and pancreatic surgery, as well as for liver resection. A total of 6 Cochrane reviews including 65 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 9 retrospective analyses, as well as 1 more recent RCT and 3 retrospective analyses that were not included in a meta-analysis were reviewed.
conclusionThere is evidence that drains should not be routinely used in elective abdominal surgery, such as cholecystectomy, colorectal resection and gastrectomy. Even for some cases of pancreatic and liver resection, there is growing evidence that routine placement of drains is not mandatory. In conclusion, there is a need for more prospective randomized controlled trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28361269What 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.