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

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/323616
Title:
Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty.
Authors:
Kelly, Enda G; Cashman, James P; Imran, Farrah H; Conroy, Ronán; O'Byrne, John
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital Dublin, Ireland.
Citation:
Kelly EG et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2014, 24:295-301
Publisher:
Surgical technology international
Journal:
Surgical technology international
Issue Date:
Mar-2014
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/323616
PubMed ID:
24574017
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.
Item Type:
Article
Language:
en
Keywords:
SURGERY
Local subject classification:
SURGERY, ORTHOPAEDIC; ARTHROPLASTY; ORTHOPAEDICS
ISSN:
1090-3941

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorKelly, Enda Gen_GB
dc.contributor.authorCashman, James Pen_GB
dc.contributor.authorImran, Farrah Hen_GB
dc.contributor.authorConroy, Ronánen_GB
dc.contributor.authorO'Byrne, Johnen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-23T09:31:40Z-
dc.date.available2014-07-23T09:31:40Z-
dc.date.issued2014-03-
dc.identifier.citationKelly EG et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2014, 24:295-301en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1090-3941-
dc.identifier.pmid24574017-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/323616-
dc.description.abstractThe 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.en_GB
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSurgical technology internationalen_GB
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to Surgical technology internationalen_GB
dc.subjectSURGERYen_GB
dc.subject.otherSURGERY, ORTHOPAEDICen_GB
dc.subject.otherARTHROPLASTYen_GB
dc.subject.otherORTHOPAEDICSen_GB
dc.titleSystematic review and meta-analysis of closed suction drainage versus non-drainage in primary hip arthroplasty.en_GB
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital Dublin, Ireland.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalSurgical technology internationalen_GB
dc.description.fundingNo fundingen
dc.description.provinceLeinsteren
dc.description.peer-reviewpeer-reviewen

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.