Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2021
Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04333264 (Clinical Analysis of Suction Drainage in Cementless Hip Replacement - a Prospective Randomized Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Clinical Analysis of Suction Drainage in Cementless Hip Replacement - a Prospective Randomized Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic iodine levels increase with povidone-iodine irrigation, but does this affect thyroid functions? A case-control study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Trial
- Effect of different application duration of a venous foot pump on prevention of venous thromboembolism after hip and knee arthroplasty: a multicenter prospective clinical trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Trial
- Does closed suction drainage reduce postoperative hematoma and muscle swelling after total hip arthroplasty? A retrospective comparative study using computed tomography.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2026Article
- Closed suction drainage is not beneficial in hybrid total hip arthroplasty with intra-articular administration of tranexamic acid: a propensity score-matched cohort study.International orthopaedics · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of drains reportedly does not improve surgical outcomes after hip replacement. There is still a lack of strict recommendations for drain placement after primary hip replacement. This study aimed to assess the safety of not using suction drainage after primary hip replacement in a population of patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis.
methodsIn this prospective randomized study, all patients were qualified for primary hip replacement and were divided into two groups: with and without drainage. The inclusion criterion was idiopathic hip osteoarthritis. The exclusion criteria were secondary coxarthrosis, autoimmune disease, coagulopathy, venous/arterial thrombosis, hepatic/renal insufficiency, cement, or hybrid endoprostheses. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical, laboratory, and radiographic parameters were measured for the first three days after surgery. Hematoma collection, due to extended thromboprophylaxis, in the joint and soft tissues was evaluated precisely. The patients underwent follow-up for 30 days.
resultsThe final analysis included a total of 100 patients. We did not find any significant statistical differences between groups in terms of hip fluid collection (9.76 vs. 10.33 mm, with and without drainage, respectively; mean difference, 0.6 mm; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -2.8 to 3.9; p = 0.653), estimated blood loss (1126 vs. 1224 ml; mean difference, 97.1 ml; 95 % CI -84.1 to 278.2; p = 0.59), and hemoglobin levels on postoperative day 3 (11.05 vs. 10.85 g/dl; mean difference, 0.2; 95 % CI -2.1 to 2.5; p = 0.53). In addition, the other parameters did not show significant differences between groups. Notably, two cases of early infections were observed in the no-drainage group, whereas there were no such complications in the drainage group.
conclusionsWe conclude that the use of closed suction drainage after primary hip replacement is a safe procedure in patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis. Further research is warranted to validate these findings.
trial registrationThe study was successfully registered retrospectively at Clinicaltrial.gov with the identification number NCT04333264 03 April 2020.
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.