BJS open · 2025
Use and management of routine prophylactic abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pietrogiovanna Laura, Probst Pascal, van Bodegraven Eduard A, Balduzzi Alberto, Kaiser Jörg, Hackert Thilo, Kalkum Eva, Müller Philip C, Canovi Sara, Antony Pia, Strothmann Hendrik, Besselink Marc G, Marchegiani Giovanni, Storni Federico, Dullenkopf Alexander, Hauswirth Fabian, Muller Markus K, Renzulli Pietro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The use of abdominal drains in pancreatic surgery, both in partial pancreatoduodenectomy and left pancreatectomy, remains controversial. This study explored the value of routine abdominal drainage on postoperative outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and PubMed up to 1 May 2025. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the use and management of routine prophylactic abdominal drainage in patients undergoing pancreatic resections were included. A random-effects model for Mantel-Haenszel and inverse-variance analysis was used. Risk of bias (Cochrane 2.0) and certainty of evidence GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were assessed.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs with 2796 patients were included. Ten RCTs on partial pancreatoduodenectomy with 1744 patients, and seven RCTs on left pancreatectomy with 1052 patients. Four interventions were studied: abdominal drainage versus no abdominal drainage, irrigation-suction versus passive-gravity drainage, closed-suction versus passive-gravity drainage, and early versus late drain removal. Stratification for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and left pancreatectomy was performed, resulting in eight different line-ups. Two line-ups provided sufficient data to allow meta-analysis. Early drainage removal in partial pancreatoduodenectomy, following the study inclusion criteria, was shown to be safe with the additional benefit of significantly reducing chyle leak (odds ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval (c.i.) 0.08 to 0.59; P < 0.01). The omission of routine abdominal drainage in left pancreatectomy was found to be safe, resulting in fewer postoperative pancreatic fistulas (odds ratio 0.52, 95% c.i. 0.36 to 0.77; P < 0.01) and a shorter hospital stay (mean difference -0.48 days, 95% c.i. -0.61 to -0.35; P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis provides level 1a evidence in favour of a selective early drain removal policy in partial pancreatoduodenectomy and a no-drain policy in left pancreatectomy.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and PubMed up to 1 May 2025. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the use and management of routine prophylactic abdominal drainage in patients undergoing pancreatic resections were included. A random-effects model for Mantel-Haenszel and inverse-variance analysis was used. Risk of bias (Cochrane 2.0) and certainty of evidence GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were assessed.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs with 2796 patients were included. Ten RCTs on partial pancreatoduodenectomy with 1744 patients, and seven RCTs on left pancreatectomy with 1052 patients. Four interventions were studied: abdominal drainage versus no abdominal drainage, irrigation-suction versus passive-gravity drainage, closed-suction versus passive-gravity drainage, and early versus late drain removal. Stratification for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and left pancreatectomy was performed, resulting in eight different line-ups. Two line-ups provided sufficient data to allow meta-analysis. Early drainage removal in partial pancreatoduodenectomy, following the study inclusion criteria, was shown to be safe with the additional benefit of significantly reducing chyle leak (odds ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval (c.i.) 0.08 to 0.59; P < 0.01). The omission of routine abdominal drainage in left pancreatectomy was found to be safe, resulting in fewer postoperative pancreatic fistulas (odds ratio 0.52, 95% c.i. 0.36 to 0.77; P < 0.01) and a shorter hospital stay (mean difference -0.48 days, 95% c.i. -0.61 to -0.35; P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis provides level 1a evidence in favour of a selective early drain removal policy in partial pancreatoduodenectomy and a no-drain policy in left pancreatectomy.