暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Whether to use surgical drains after abdominal surgery or not has received much attention since a hundred years ago. Nowadays, lateral transperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LTLA) is a widely used technique to treat adrenal tumors worldwide. However, the placement of drains after LTLA remains controversial.
UNASSIGNED: Data of 150 patients, who underwent LTLA between October 2014 and September 2020 by the same lead surgeon, were collected, including demographic, pathology, preoperative, operative variables and postoperative complications. The patients were divided into two groups, with and without drainage. The postoperative recovery of the two groups was compared.
UNASSIGNED: Among 150 patients (65 men and 85 women, median age 48 years, median BMI 23.53), 89 patients had no drainage and 61 patients had drainage after surgery. Variables of the two groups were analyzed. Placement of drains correlated with long operative time (P<0.01). Patients with drain had longer hospital stays (P<0.001) and a higher incidence of postoperative complications (P=0.022). Other factors, including tumor size (P=0.61), tumor location (P=0.387), ASA score (P=0.687), pathology (P=0.55), VAS pain score (P=0.41), intraoperative blood loss (P=0.11), were not found to be significantly associated with drain placement. There was no conversion to open surgery in both groups. Moreover, no mortality was observed in either group.
UNASSIGNED: This study revealed that it is feasible and safe not to leave a drain in selective and uncomplicated patients and that surgical drainage should not be routine after LTLA.

Abdominoplasty using progressive tension sutures (PTS) without drains has been reported to lower seroma risk. However, evidence regarding the reproducibility of PTS drainless abdominoplasty in lowering seroma risk is inconsistent and limited to a few studies.
The purpose of this review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of PTS without drains in reducing seroma rates associated with abdominoplasty.
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched with no restrictions for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in which the number of patients who experienced postoperative seroma was indicated. The keywords included \'\'progressive tension sutures,\'\' \'\'quilting sutures,\'\' \"drain,\" and \"abdominoplasty.\'\' Review Manager software (RevMan, version 5.3) was utilized to compute the pooled effect estimate using a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model. The outcomes were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analysis was conducted based on whether abdominoplasty was combined with liposuction.
Five studies were included (one RCT and four retrospective studies) involving a total of 1255 adult patients. Patients who underwent abdominoplasty using PTS without drains experienced a significantly lower rate of postoperative seroma compared to those with drains (D) only (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.70; P = 0.002; I2 = 9%). There was no significant difference in postoperative seroma rates between the PTS and PTS + D groups (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.30-3.54; P = 0.96; I2 = 0%). The data analysis for the subgroup that included liposuction showed that compared with the use of drain only, PTS were associated with a significantly reduced number of seromas (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49; P = 0.0001; I2 = 0%).
Abdominoplasty using PTS without drain and combined with liposuction was effective in reducing seroma rates. Additional RCTs with larger sample sizes and better comparability are needed to confirm the safety and effectiveness of the drainless abdominoplasty technique using progressive tension sutures.
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 .

BACKGROUND: Previous randomized controlled trials have compared the efficacy and safety of single chest drain (SCD) and double chest drains (DCD) in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy, yet the results remain inconsistent. Therefore, we aimed to conduct this present systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of SCD and DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy.
METHODS: PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Weipu, and China Biomedical Literature databases were searched up to February 28, 2020, to identify the potential RCTs on SCD and DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy. The main outcomes including verbal pain score, the duration of drainage (days), the length of hospital stay (days), and the incidence of air leak and re-drainage were collected and analyzed. All the data were processed and analyzed with software RevMan 5.3. We calculated and analyzed the odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 11 RCTs with 1214 patients were included, in which 589 patients received SCD treatment and 625 patients DCD treatment. The verbal pain score (MD = - 0.54, 95%CI (- 0.87, - 0.21)), the duration of drainage (MD = - 0.65, 95%CI (- 1.04, - 0.26)), and the length of hospital stay (MD = - 0.55, 95%CI (- 0.80, - 0.29)) in SCD group were significantly less than that of DCD group. There were no significant differences on the incidence of air leak (OR = 1.35, 95%CI (0.86, 2.11)) and re-drainage (OR = 0.88, 95%CI (0.41, 1.90)) among the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: SCD is a safe option, and it has the advantages of less postoperative pain, shortened duration of drain, and reduced length of hospital stay when compared with DCD in the patients undergone pulmonary lobectomy.

Prophylactic drain in gastrectomy for cancer is still widely used, although some evidence has disputed this practice and spreading enhanced recovery protocol has been pushing towards surgical simplification. This study aimed at assessing the impact of drain placement on important clinical outcomes, evaluating the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or cohort studies whenever information provided by the former was scarce. PubMed, PMC, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched from January 1990 to February 2019, both for RCTs and cohort studies comparing use or avoidance of prophylactic drain in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy. All RCTs and cohort studies were rated according to Jadad score and Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale, respectively. Meta-analysis was separately performed on RCTs and cohort studies. The following clinical outcomes were considered: anastomotic leak, reoperation rate, additional drain procedure, length of stay, postoperative morbidity, postoperative mortality, readmission rate and drain related complications. Overall, 3 RCTs (330 patients) and 7 cohort studies (2897 patients) were included. Seven studies came from Eastern Countries. Meta-analysis on RCTs evidenced that drain avoidance halves overall morbidity (RR = 0.47, 95%CI 0.26-0.86, p = 0.014) and slightly reduces length of stay (SMD -0.24, 95%CI -0.51-0.03, p = 0.083). Only one postoperative death occurred in the drain group. The other outcomes were either not reported or reported just by one RCT each. Meta-analysis on cohort studies, despite higher statistical power, did not highlight any significant difference. This meta-analysis showed that prophylactic drain avoidance can reduce morbidity and length of stay, while not significantly affecting other major surgical outcomes.

Seroma is a commonly encountered sequela after hernia repair. Tremendous effort has been spent to investigate the effective way to prevent this \"complication\" including the modification of surgical technique, use of per-peritoneal drainage, etc. There were debates about the use of monopolar diathermy versus blunt dissection in laparoscopic TEP in the prevention of seroma formation. This randomized study aims to compare the effects of using 2 techniques in laparoscopic TEP on pre-peritoneal drain output and seroma formation.
From 1.9.2018 to 30.9.2019, all male and female patients presented with the first occurrence, unilateral inguinal hernia anticipated for laparoscopic TEP were enrolled into the study after informed consent. Patients were randomized into \"monopolar dissection preferred\" (MDP) group and \"blunt dissection-preferred\" (BDP) group just before commencing of operation after general anesthesia. Surgeons were instructed to use monopolar energy as main dissection method for the whole operation if possible (MDP), whereas blunt dissection is the preferred choice in BDP group, but the use of monopolar energy was allowed if needed. Total energy time was measured by a specially designed homemade device attaching to the monopolar pedals as accurate as to millisecond (ms). Pre-peritoneal drains were inserted for drainage and removed 23 h after operation. Drainage output, total operating time, energy time, clinical and ultrasonic seroma sizes at day 1, day 6, 1-month post operations, recurrence are compared between 2 groups.
A total of 103 patients where included. There was no significant difference in age, gender, co-morbidities, side of hernia, mean defect size, operating time, fixation adjuncts, or postoperative stay. The drain volume in BDP group is 71.13 ± 31.42 mL while it in MDP group is 56.36 ± 21.46 mL. The MDP group had significantly fewer drain output at 23 h post operation (p = 0.007) and lower seroma incidence on days 6 (p = 0.036). Overall incidence of seroma formation was 12% on postoperative day 1, 11% on postoperative day 7. No statistically differences in postoperative pain score or complications were observed at the first week, 1- and 3-months\' post operation. There was no correlation with energy time to the drain output. No recurrence was found in subsequent follow-up.
Pre-peritoneal drainage is clinically safe in laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal hernioplasty and can effectively reduce the size and incidence of seroma. The seroma formation can be further reduced by appropriate use of monopolar energy as preferred dissection approach in lap TEP. Due to limitation in measuring the actual energy time, the result should be further validated by randomized multi-centers trial on its potential benefit in hernia repair by a more accurate measuring device on energy used.

Peritoneal drainage has been used routinely after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP). Our objective was to compare patients\' outcomes after PD or DP with or without peritoneal drainage.
We performed a systematic search using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 1 June 2019. We included trials comparing no peritoneal drainage versus drainage after PD and/or DP.
Ten trials involving 2419 patients were eligible for inclusion. The meta-analysis showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula in the no-drain group (odds ratio [OR] 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.51; p < 0.00001). However, there was no significant difference in the analysis of the subgroups, DP and DP + PD peritoneal drainage (p = 0.10, p = 0.19; respectively). The analysis of all studies showed no significant difference between groups regarding clinically related postoperative pancreatic fistula (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.41-1.24; p = 0.23). Mortality was higher in the drain group in the PD + DP subgroup (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.27-0.62; p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found regarding intra-abdominal abscess, delayed gastric emptying, biliary fistula, postoperative hemorrhage, or morbidity.
Our results showed comparable outcomes for PD and DP with or without drainage. However, we can draw no clear conclusions because of the study limitations. Further studies on this topic are recommended.

BACKGROUND: In an enhanced recovery after surgery program, not placing a closed suction drain following routine primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is becoming more acceptable. However, the influence of drain use on transfusion rate and postoperative length of stay (PLOS) in TJA remains controversial. Therefore, we aimed to compare drain use with no drain in routine primary TJA to determine the differences in transfusion rate and PLOS.
METHODS: We analyzed the data from 12,992 patients undergoing primary unilateral TJA: 6325 total knee arthroplasties (TKA) and 6667 total hip arthroplasties (THA). Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received a drain postoperatively following TKA and THA. We extracted information for transfusion and PLOS from patients\' electronic health records and analyzed the data by logistic and linear regression analyses.
RESULTS: The transfusion rate and PLOS were 15.07% and 7.75 ± 3.61 days, respectively, in the drain group and 6.72% and 6.54 ± 3.32 days, respectively, in the no-drain group following TKA. The transfusion rate and PLOS were 20.53% and 7.00 ± 3.35 days, respectively, in the drain group and 13.57% and 6.07 ± 3.06 days, respectively, in the no-drain group following THA. After adjusting for the following variables: age, gender, body mass index, orthopedic diagnoses, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, preoperative hemoglobin, albumin, analgesic use, anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, tranexamic acid use, intraoperative bleeding, operative time, and tourniquet use (for TKA), drain use correlated significantly with a higher transfusion rate (risk ratio = 2.812, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.224-3.554, P < 0.001 for TKA and risk ratio = 1.872, 95% CI 1.588-2.207, P < 0.001 for THA) and a longer PLOS (partial regression coefficient (B) = 1.099, 95% CI 0.879-1.318, P < 0.001, standard regression coefficient (B\') = 0.139 for TKA; B = 0.973, 95% CI 0.695-1.051, P < 0.001, and B\' = 0.115 for THA). Two groups showed no significant difference in wound complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated that drain use was associated with a higher transfusion rate and a longer PLOS in patients undergoing routine primary TJA. The routine use of postoperative drainage is not recommended in primary unilateral TJA.

Seroma is a virtually unavoidable early sequela after TEP hernioplasty. This randomised controlled trial evaluated the outcomes of preperitoneal closed-system suction drainage in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernioplasty for inguinal hernia.
Ninety patients aged 18-80 years who presented to our hospital between May 2016 and February 2017 with primary unilateral inguinal hernia were randomised into the preperitoneal drain and no-drain groups. The primary outcome was seroma size on postoperative day 6. Secondary outcomes included clinical seroma formation and seroma size on day 1, day 6, 1 and 7 months postoperatively, length of postoperative stay, pain score, and recurrence.
There was no significant difference in age, sex, co-morbidities, hernia side, mean hernia size, operating time, fixation adjuncts, or postoperative stay. The overall incidence of clinical seroma formation was 25.6% on postoperative day 1, 60.3% on postoperative day 6, 13.2% 1 month and 0% 7 months postoperatively. The mean drain output was 57.9 ml. The drain group had significantly fewer patients with seroma on day 1 (6 vs 14, p = 0.022) and day 6 (17 vs 30, p = 0.000), and a smaller mean seroma size on days 1 and 6 (p = 0.000). Subgroup analysis showed that sac ligation versus reduction, peritoneal perforation, and fixation adjuncts had no significant effects on seroma formation or size. There is a trend of lower early post-operation VAS score and more urinary retention in drain group was observed but not reaching statistical significance. No differences in postoperative pain score or complications were observed at 1 and 7 months\' post operation.
Preperitoneal drainage for 23 h after laparoscopic TEP hernioplasty for inguinal hernia can effectively decrease seroma formation in the early postoperative period, and potentially improving postoperative pain. The benefit is short-term and no significant difference was demonstrated after 1-month post operations. This tradition technique applied to novel operative repair of inguinal hernia is safe and feasible with no significant morbidity demonstrated. Preperitoneal drainage after TEP can be considered as an option to improve patient satisfactions and recovery in selected patient group for maximal benefit, especially for those with prolonged operation which may associate with higher chance of seroma formation.

The aim is to assess the benefits and harms of routine abdominal drainage in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until August 2016. We included all randomised clinical trials comparing drainage versus no drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy irrespective of language and publication status. We used standard methodological procedures in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A total of 2398 participants were randomised to drain (1197 participants) versus \'no drain\' (1201 participants) in 16 trials included in this article. Pain 24 h after surgery was less severe in the no drain group (MD1.31; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.65; p < 0.00001). Abdominal drainage prolonged operative time (MD 5.77 min; 95% CI 4.98 min-6.57 min; p < 0.00001) but not the length of hospital stay (MD 0.21 days; 95% CI -0.00 days to 0.42 days; p = 0.05). No significant difference was present with respect to the intra-abdominal fluid, wound infection, nausea or vomit, mortality after operation. There is no significant advantage of drain placement after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Further well designed randomized clinical trials should be carefully re-considered.