Cargando…
Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study
BACKGROUND: The use of drains reportedly does not improve surgical outcomes after hip replacement. There is still a lack of strict recommendations for drain placement after primary hip replacement. This study aimed to assess the safety of not using suction drainage after primary hip replacement in a...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8364014/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34389016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04583-0 |
_version_ | 1783738455144005632 |
---|---|
author | Bartosz, Paweł Marczyński, Wojciech Para, Marcin Kogut, Maciej Białecki, Jerzy |
author_facet | Bartosz, Paweł Marczyński, Wojciech Para, Marcin Kogut, Maciej Białecki, Jerzy |
author_sort | Bartosz, Paweł |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The use of drains reportedly does not improve surgical outcomes after hip replacement. There is still a lack of strict recommendations for drain placement after primary hip replacement. This study aimed to assess the safety of not using suction drainage after primary hip replacement in a population of patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, all patients were qualified for primary hip replacement and were divided into two groups: with and without drainage. The inclusion criterion was idiopathic hip osteoarthritis. The exclusion criteria were secondary coxarthrosis, autoimmune disease, coagulopathy, venous/arterial thrombosis, hepatic/renal insufficiency, cement, or hybrid endoprostheses. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical, laboratory, and radiographic parameters were measured for the first three days after surgery. Hematoma collection, due to extended thromboprophylaxis, in the joint and soft tissues was evaluated precisely. The patients underwent follow-up for 30 days. RESULTS: The final analysis included a total of 100 patients. We did not find any significant statistical differences between groups in terms of hip fluid collection (9.76 vs. 10.33 mm, with and without drainage, respectively; mean difference, 0.6 mm; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -2.8 to 3.9; p = 0.653), estimated blood loss (1126 vs. 1224 ml; mean difference, 97.1 ml; 95 % CI -84.1 to 278.2; p = 0.59), and hemoglobin levels on postoperative day 3 (11.05 vs. 10.85 g/dl; mean difference, 0.2; 95 % CI -2.1 to 2.5; p = 0.53). In addition, the other parameters did not show significant differences between groups. Notably, two cases of early infections were observed in the no-drainage group, whereas there were no such complications in the drainage group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the use of closed suction drainage after primary hip replacement is a safe procedure in patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis. Further research is warranted to validate these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was successfully registered retrospectively at Clinicaltrial.gov with the identification number NCT04333264 03 April 2020. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8364014 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83640142021-08-17 Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study Bartosz, Paweł Marczyński, Wojciech Para, Marcin Kogut, Maciej Białecki, Jerzy BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The use of drains reportedly does not improve surgical outcomes after hip replacement. There is still a lack of strict recommendations for drain placement after primary hip replacement. This study aimed to assess the safety of not using suction drainage after primary hip replacement in a population of patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, all patients were qualified for primary hip replacement and were divided into two groups: with and without drainage. The inclusion criterion was idiopathic hip osteoarthritis. The exclusion criteria were secondary coxarthrosis, autoimmune disease, coagulopathy, venous/arterial thrombosis, hepatic/renal insufficiency, cement, or hybrid endoprostheses. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical, laboratory, and radiographic parameters were measured for the first three days after surgery. Hematoma collection, due to extended thromboprophylaxis, in the joint and soft tissues was evaluated precisely. The patients underwent follow-up for 30 days. RESULTS: The final analysis included a total of 100 patients. We did not find any significant statistical differences between groups in terms of hip fluid collection (9.76 vs. 10.33 mm, with and without drainage, respectively; mean difference, 0.6 mm; 95 % confidence interval [CI] -2.8 to 3.9; p = 0.653), estimated blood loss (1126 vs. 1224 ml; mean difference, 97.1 ml; 95 % CI -84.1 to 278.2; p = 0.59), and hemoglobin levels on postoperative day 3 (11.05 vs. 10.85 g/dl; mean difference, 0.2; 95 % CI -2.1 to 2.5; p = 0.53). In addition, the other parameters did not show significant differences between groups. Notably, two cases of early infections were observed in the no-drainage group, whereas there were no such complications in the drainage group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the use of closed suction drainage after primary hip replacement is a safe procedure in patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis. Further research is warranted to validate these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was successfully registered retrospectively at Clinicaltrial.gov with the identification number NCT04333264 03 April 2020. BioMed Central 2021-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8364014/ /pubmed/34389016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04583-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Bartosz, Paweł Marczyński, Wojciech Para, Marcin Kogut, Maciej Białecki, Jerzy Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title | Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title_full | Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title_fullStr | Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title_short | Comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
title_sort | comparative study of suction drainage placement in cementless hip replacement among patients undergoing extended thromboprophylaxis: a prospective randomized study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8364014/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34389016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04583-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bartoszpaweł comparativestudyofsuctiondrainageplacementincementlesshipreplacementamongpatientsundergoingextendedthromboprophylaxisaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT marczynskiwojciech comparativestudyofsuctiondrainageplacementincementlesshipreplacementamongpatientsundergoingextendedthromboprophylaxisaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT paramarcin comparativestudyofsuctiondrainageplacementincementlesshipreplacementamongpatientsundergoingextendedthromboprophylaxisaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT kogutmaciej comparativestudyofsuctiondrainageplacementincementlesshipreplacementamongpatientsundergoingextendedthromboprophylaxisaprospectiverandomizedstudy AT białeckijerzy comparativestudyofsuctiondrainageplacementincementlesshipreplacementamongpatientsundergoingextendedthromboprophylaxisaprospectiverandomizedstudy |