Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty

Enda G. Kelly, James P. Cashman, Farrah Hani Imran, Ronán Conroy, John O'Byrne

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The routine use of drains in surgery has been dogmatically instituted in some disciplines. Orthopaedic surgery is one such sub-speciality. The use of postoperative closed suction drainage in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become increasingly controversial with multiple randomised control trials performed to assess the benefit to outcome in THA. The hypothesis of this systematic review is that closed suction drainage does not infer a benefit and increase transfusion requirements of primary total hip arthroplasty patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. A search of the available literature was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE using a combination of MeSH terms and Boolean operators. All data analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.1. Sixteen studies (n=2705) were included in the analysis. Post-operative closed suction drainage was found to increase total blood loss and blood transfusion requirements (p<0.05). Surgical site infection demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.82). No significant difference in haematoma formation between groups (p=0.19) was elicited. The routine use of closed suction drainage systems post primary hip arthroplasty is not supported by this meta-analysis. However, the heterogeneity between studies does limit the accuracy of the meta-analysis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)295-301
Number of pages7
JournalSurgical technology international
Volume24
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Suction
Arthroplasty
Meta-Analysis
Hip
Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed
MEDLINE
Blood Transfusion
Hematoma
Orthopedics
Registries
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty. / Kelly, Enda G.; Cashman, James P.; Imran, Farrah Hani; Conroy, Ronán; O'Byrne, John.

In: Surgical technology international, Vol. 24, 01.03.2014, p. 295-301.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4f5152d088784590b7a291fa5f8dd461,
title = "Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty",
abstract = "The routine use of drains in surgery has been dogmatically instituted in some disciplines. Orthopaedic surgery is one such sub-speciality. The use of postoperative closed suction drainage in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become increasingly controversial with multiple randomised control trials performed to assess the benefit to outcome in THA. The hypothesis of this systematic review is that closed suction drainage does not infer a benefit and increase transfusion requirements of primary total hip arthroplasty patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. A search of the available literature was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE using a combination of MeSH terms and Boolean operators. All data analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.1. Sixteen studies (n=2705) were included in the analysis. Post-operative closed suction drainage was found to increase total blood loss and blood transfusion requirements (p<0.05). Surgical site infection demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.82). No significant difference in haematoma formation between groups (p=0.19) was elicited. The routine use of closed suction drainage systems post primary hip arthroplasty is not supported by this meta-analysis. However, the heterogeneity between studies does limit the accuracy of the meta-analysis.",
author = "Kelly, {Enda G.} and Cashman, {James P.} and Imran, {Farrah Hani} and Ron{\'a}n Conroy and John O'Byrne",
year = "2014",
month = "3",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "295--301",
journal = "Surgical technology international",
issn = "1090-3941",
publisher = "Universal Medical Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty

AU - Kelly, Enda G.

AU - Cashman, James P.

AU - Imran, Farrah Hani

AU - Conroy, Ronán

AU - O'Byrne, John

PY - 2014/3/1

Y1 - 2014/3/1

N2 - The routine use of drains in surgery has been dogmatically instituted in some disciplines. Orthopaedic surgery is one such sub-speciality. The use of postoperative closed suction drainage in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become increasingly controversial with multiple randomised control trials performed to assess the benefit to outcome in THA. The hypothesis of this systematic review is that closed suction drainage does not infer a benefit and increase transfusion requirements of primary total hip arthroplasty patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. A search of the available literature was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE using a combination of MeSH terms and Boolean operators. All data analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.1. Sixteen studies (n=2705) were included in the analysis. Post-operative closed suction drainage was found to increase total blood loss and blood transfusion requirements (p<0.05). Surgical site infection demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.82). No significant difference in haematoma formation between groups (p=0.19) was elicited. The routine use of closed suction drainage systems post primary hip arthroplasty is not supported by this meta-analysis. However, the heterogeneity between studies does limit the accuracy of the meta-analysis.

AB - The routine use of drains in surgery has been dogmatically instituted in some disciplines. Orthopaedic surgery is one such sub-speciality. The use of postoperative closed suction drainage in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become increasingly controversial with multiple randomised control trials performed to assess the benefit to outcome in THA. The hypothesis of this systematic review is that closed suction drainage does not infer a benefit and increase transfusion requirements of primary total hip arthroplasty patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. A search of the available literature was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE using a combination of MeSH terms and Boolean operators. All data analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.1. Sixteen studies (n=2705) were included in the analysis. Post-operative closed suction drainage was found to increase total blood loss and blood transfusion requirements (p<0.05). Surgical site infection demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.82). No significant difference in haematoma formation between groups (p=0.19) was elicited. The routine use of closed suction drainage systems post primary hip arthroplasty is not supported by this meta-analysis. However, the heterogeneity between studies does limit the accuracy of the meta-analysis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016403602&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016403602&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 24574017

AN - SCOPUS:85016403602

VL - 24

SP - 295

EP - 301

JO - Surgical technology international

JF - Surgical technology international

SN - 1090-3941

ER -