Cargando…
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections
Prophylactic drainage after major liver resection remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the value of prophylactic drainage after major liver resection. PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched. Postoperative bile leak, bleeding, interventional dra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7862226/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33542274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82333-x |
_version_ | 1783647243344019456 |
---|---|
author | Dezfouli, Sepehr Abbasi Ünal, Umut Kaan Ghamarnejad, Omid Khajeh, Elias Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sadeq Ramouz, Ali Salehpour, Roozbeh Golriz, Mohammad Chang, De-Hua Mieth, Markus Hoffmann, Katrin Probst, Pascal Mehrabi, Arianeb |
author_facet | Dezfouli, Sepehr Abbasi Ünal, Umut Kaan Ghamarnejad, Omid Khajeh, Elias Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sadeq Ramouz, Ali Salehpour, Roozbeh Golriz, Mohammad Chang, De-Hua Mieth, Markus Hoffmann, Katrin Probst, Pascal Mehrabi, Arianeb |
author_sort | Dezfouli, Sepehr Abbasi |
collection | PubMed |
description | Prophylactic drainage after major liver resection remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the value of prophylactic drainage after major liver resection. PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched. Postoperative bile leak, bleeding, interventional drainage, wound infection, total complications, and length of hospital stay were the outcomes of interest. Dichotomous outcomes were presented as odds ratios (OR) and for continuous outcomes, weighted mean differences (MDs) were computed by the inverse variance method. Summary effect measures are presented together with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grades of Research, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, which was mostly moderate for evaluated outcomes. Three randomized controlled trials and five non-randomized trials including 5,050 patients were included. Bile leakage rate was higher in the drain group (OR: 2.32; 95% CI 1.18–4.55; p = 0.01) and interventional drains were inserted more frequently in this group (OR: 1.53; 95% CI 1.11–2.10; p = 0.009). Total complications were higher (OR: 1.71; 95% CI 1.45–2.03; p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay was longer (MD: 1.01 days; 95% CI 0.47–1.56 days; p < 0.001) in the drain group. The use of prophylactic drainage showed no beneficial effects after major liver resection; however, the definitions and classifications used to report on postoperative complications and surgical complexity are heterogeneous among the published studies. Further well-designed RCTs with large sample sizes are required to conclusively determine the effects of drainage after major liver resection. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7862226 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78622262021-02-05 Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections Dezfouli, Sepehr Abbasi Ünal, Umut Kaan Ghamarnejad, Omid Khajeh, Elias Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sadeq Ramouz, Ali Salehpour, Roozbeh Golriz, Mohammad Chang, De-Hua Mieth, Markus Hoffmann, Katrin Probst, Pascal Mehrabi, Arianeb Sci Rep Article Prophylactic drainage after major liver resection remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the value of prophylactic drainage after major liver resection. PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched. Postoperative bile leak, bleeding, interventional drainage, wound infection, total complications, and length of hospital stay were the outcomes of interest. Dichotomous outcomes were presented as odds ratios (OR) and for continuous outcomes, weighted mean differences (MDs) were computed by the inverse variance method. Summary effect measures are presented together with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grades of Research, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, which was mostly moderate for evaluated outcomes. Three randomized controlled trials and five non-randomized trials including 5,050 patients were included. Bile leakage rate was higher in the drain group (OR: 2.32; 95% CI 1.18–4.55; p = 0.01) and interventional drains were inserted more frequently in this group (OR: 1.53; 95% CI 1.11–2.10; p = 0.009). Total complications were higher (OR: 1.71; 95% CI 1.45–2.03; p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay was longer (MD: 1.01 days; 95% CI 0.47–1.56 days; p < 0.001) in the drain group. The use of prophylactic drainage showed no beneficial effects after major liver resection; however, the definitions and classifications used to report on postoperative complications and surgical complexity are heterogeneous among the published studies. Further well-designed RCTs with large sample sizes are required to conclusively determine the effects of drainage after major liver resection. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7862226/ /pubmed/33542274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82333-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Dezfouli, Sepehr Abbasi Ünal, Umut Kaan Ghamarnejad, Omid Khajeh, Elias Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sadeq Ramouz, Ali Salehpour, Roozbeh Golriz, Mohammad Chang, De-Hua Mieth, Markus Hoffmann, Katrin Probst, Pascal Mehrabi, Arianeb Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title | Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title_full | Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title_fullStr | Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title_short | Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
title_sort | systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of prophylactic abdominal drainage in major liver resections |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7862226/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33542274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82333-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dezfoulisepehrabbasi systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT unalumutkaan systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT ghamarnejadomid systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT khajehelias systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT alihasanalsaeghsadeq systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT ramouzali systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT salehpourroozbeh systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT golrizmohammad systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT changdehua systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT miethmarkus systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT hoffmannkatrin systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT probstpascal systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections AT mehrabiarianeb systematicreviewandmetaanalysisoftheefficacyofprophylacticabdominaldrainageinmajorliverresections |