Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37897691›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2025

Surgeon Preferences Worldwide in Wound Drain Utilization in Open Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Pathologies.

Juan P Cabrera, Matthew F Gary, Sathish Muthu, S Tim Yoon, Ho-Joong Kim, Samuel K Cho, Stipe Ćorluka, Stephen J Lewis, So Kato, Zorica Buser and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

13 authors.

Juan P CabreraDepartment of Neurosurgery, Hospital Clínico Regional de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.ORCID 0000-0003-4685-6106
Matthew F GaryDepartment of Neurosurgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sathish MuthuOrthopaedic Research Group, Coimbatore, India.ORCID 0000-0002-7143-4354
S Tim YoonDepartment of Orthopedics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1010-6952
Ho-Joong KimSpine Center and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of South Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8205-4648
Samuel K ChoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Stipe ĆorlukaSpinal Surgery Division, Department of Traumatology, University Hospital Centre Sestre Milosrdnice, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-5732-1150
Stephen J LewisDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Toronto, University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9173-8443
So KatoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0835-2724
Zorica BuserGerling Institute, Brooklyn, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5680-0643
Jeffrey C WangUSC Spine Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Patrick C HsiehDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7206-4842
AO Spine Knowledge Forum DegenerativeResearch Department, AO Spine, AO Foundation, Davos, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designCross-sectional survey.

objectiveAlthough literature does not recommend routine wound drain utilization, there is a disconnect between the evidence and clinical practice. This study aims to explore into this controversy and analyze the surgeon preferences related to drain utilization, and the factors influencing drain use and criterion for removal.

methodsA survey was distributed to AO Spine members worldwide. Surgeon demographics and factors related to peri-operative drain use in 1 or 2-level open fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative pathologies were collected. Multivariate analyses by drain utilization, and criterion of removal were conducted.

results231 surgeons participated, including 220 males (95.2%), orthopedics (178, 77.1%), and academic/university-affiliated (114, 49.4%). Most surgeons preferred drain use (186, 80.5%) and subfascial drains (169, 73.2%). Drains were removed based on duration by 52.87% of the surgeons, but 27.7% removed drains based on outputs. On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of drain use were surgeon's aged 35-44 (OR = 11.9, 95% CI = 1.2-117.2,

conclusionsMost spine surgeons worldwide prefer to place a subfascial wound drain for degenerative open lumbar surgery. The choice for drain placement is associated with the surgeon's age and use of coaptive films for wound closure, while the criterion for drain removal is associated with the surgeons' region of practice and experience.

Indexed as

hematomainfectionlumbar spine surgerypostoperative complicationsspinal fusionwound drain

Identifiers

PMID37897691
PMCPMC11877467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.