Cargando…
Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study
INTRODUCTION: Despite of their extensive use, drains remain controversial without clear guidelines, and there is unclear evidence on drain use in spine procedures. Negative pressure drainage is theoretically more effective in preventing postoperative hematomas. On the contrary, it may result in exce...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37383464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2022.101709 |
_version_ | 1785062928414670848 |
---|---|
author | Elfiky, Tarek Shehata, Ramy Nafady, Mahmoud |
author_facet | Elfiky, Tarek Shehata, Ramy Nafady, Mahmoud |
author_sort | Elfiky, Tarek |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Despite of their extensive use, drains remain controversial without clear guidelines, and there is unclear evidence on drain use in spine procedures. Negative pressure drainage is theoretically more effective in preventing postoperative hematomas. On the contrary, it may result in excessive drainage and blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome between the uses of negative versus natural drainage in single level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). RESEARCH QUESTION: The aim is to compare between negative versus natural drainage after single-level PLIF as regard to postoperative wound infection, wound healing, temperature, pain and neurological deficits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomized study of consecutive PLIF patients at a single level for lumbar disc prolapse was performed between January 2019 and January 2020. The patients were randomly assigned to either the negative suction drainage group or natural drainage group. Negative suction was created by maximum compression of the reservoir to create negative pressure. In the other group, natural pressure drainage was kept without any negative pressure. Our study included a total of 62 patients who met the inclusion criteria. They were divided into two groups; 33 patients had negative suction drains and 29 patients had natural drainage. There were 32 female (51.6%) and 30 male (48.4%). Their ages ranged between of 23–69 years, with a mean age of 42.11 ± 8.89 years. RESULTS: Drainage volume was statistically higher in the negative group on the day of surgery (day 0) as well as the 1st and second days after. However, no significant differences were observed as regards to postoperative temperature, pain, wound infection, temperature, or neurological deficits. DISCUSSION &CONCLUSION: In this prospective randomized study, our results revealed that natural drainage in short term can reduce the total amount of blood in the drain, and therefore the blood loss without significant differences in postoperative wound infection, wound healing, temperature, pain, or neurological deficits in single-level PLIF. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10293117 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102931172023-06-28 Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study Elfiky, Tarek Shehata, Ramy Nafady, Mahmoud Brain Spine Article INTRODUCTION: Despite of their extensive use, drains remain controversial without clear guidelines, and there is unclear evidence on drain use in spine procedures. Negative pressure drainage is theoretically more effective in preventing postoperative hematomas. On the contrary, it may result in excessive drainage and blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome between the uses of negative versus natural drainage in single level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). RESEARCH QUESTION: The aim is to compare between negative versus natural drainage after single-level PLIF as regard to postoperative wound infection, wound healing, temperature, pain and neurological deficits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomized study of consecutive PLIF patients at a single level for lumbar disc prolapse was performed between January 2019 and January 2020. The patients were randomly assigned to either the negative suction drainage group or natural drainage group. Negative suction was created by maximum compression of the reservoir to create negative pressure. In the other group, natural pressure drainage was kept without any negative pressure. Our study included a total of 62 patients who met the inclusion criteria. They were divided into two groups; 33 patients had negative suction drains and 29 patients had natural drainage. There were 32 female (51.6%) and 30 male (48.4%). Their ages ranged between of 23–69 years, with a mean age of 42.11 ± 8.89 years. RESULTS: Drainage volume was statistically higher in the negative group on the day of surgery (day 0) as well as the 1st and second days after. However, no significant differences were observed as regards to postoperative temperature, pain, wound infection, temperature, or neurological deficits. DISCUSSION &CONCLUSION: In this prospective randomized study, our results revealed that natural drainage in short term can reduce the total amount of blood in the drain, and therefore the blood loss without significant differences in postoperative wound infection, wound healing, temperature, pain, or neurological deficits in single-level PLIF. Elsevier 2022-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10293117/ /pubmed/37383464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2022.101709 Text en © 2022 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of EUROSPINE, the Spine Society of Europe, EANS, the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Elfiky, Tarek Shehata, Ramy Nafady, Mahmoud Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title | Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title_full | Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title_fullStr | Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title_full_unstemmed | Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title_short | Negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A prospective randomized study |
title_sort | negative versus natural drainage after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. a prospective randomized study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37383464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2022.101709 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elfikytarek negativeversusnaturaldrainageaftersinglelevelposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT shehataramy negativeversusnaturaldrainageaftersinglelevelposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT nafadymahmoud negativeversusnaturaldrainageaftersinglelevelposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionaprospectiverandomizedstudy |