Observational studyAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Long Drainers After Abdominoplasty: A Risk Analysis.
Observational study in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Precision Electrosurgical Scalpel for Scarpa Sparing Abdominoplasty - Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Efficacy and Safety.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Trial
- Donor-site Seroma in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Pooled Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- The Impact of Combined Intravenous and Topical Tranexamic Acid in Abdominoplasty with Scarpa Fascia Preservation: A Pilot Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Systemic Administration of Tranexamic Acid Improves Postoperative Outcome in Abdominoplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Analysis of factors affecting the postoperative drainage in patients with abdominoplasty with circumferential liposuction.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuction drains are still one of the most accepted strategies for lowering abdominoplasty postoperative complications. Long periods with drains have been reported after a full abdominoplasty and are associated with patient discomfort, limited mobility, and slower recovery. The clinical profile of Long drainers has yet to be investigated.
objectiveIdentify risk factors that increase the number of days with drains.
methodsA single-center retrospective observational study of patients submitted to classical abdominoplasty was performed. Patients were allocated to one of two groups: Long drainers (≥ 6 days with drains) and Short drainers (< 6 days with drains). Several variables were determined: age, sex, body mass index, medical comorbidities (hypertension and diabetes mellitus), previous surgical procedures, specimen weight, time to suction drain removal, and drain output.
resultsIn total, 418 patients were included in this study, and 36% were Long drainers. There was a statistically significant difference between groups regarding total drain output, time until drain removal, body mass index, previous bariatric procedures, and specimen weight, with lower values for Short drainers. No significant differences were found in age, sex, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previous abdominal surgery. Specimen weight ≥ 750 g, body mass index ≥ 28 kg/m
conclusionThe high-risk profile for long drainage after classical full abdominoplasty is a body mass index ≥ 28 kg/m LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.