The effect of drains in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Drainage after cholecystectomy. A prospective randomized clinical trial. A controlled trial of drainage after cholecystectomy. Cholecystectomy is safer without drainage: the results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Effect of drainage on postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomised prospective trial of two drainage methods after cholecystectomy. Influence of intraperitoneal drainage after cholecystectomy; a prospective ultrasonographic study. Simple elective cholecystectomy: to drain or not. Randomized trial of drainage after cholecystectomy. Suction vaersus static drainage through a main wound versus a stab incision.
A prospective controlled randomized study was performed on 100 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy to evaluate the benefit of routine drainage in simple uncomplicated procedures. The 100 patients were randomized into two groups. Group 1 patients (n = 50) had a drain placed through the epigastric trocar site. The drain was removed before their discharge unless bile or blood was present. Group 2 patients (n = 50) did not have a drain placed. Eleven patients in group 2 (no drain) (22%) were discharged on the same day of surgery (within 8 h), and the remaining 89 patients in both groups were discharged the day after surgery (within 23 h). There were no wound infections or postoperative fever in either group. There were minor but not statistically significant differences between the two groups in postoperative severity and duration of abdominal pain, shoulder pain, and nausea. Furthermore, the two groups were similar in respect to postoperative recovery time and return to work. This prospective clinical study was done to assess the efficacy of postcholecystectomy drainage. A total of 173 cholecystectomized patients were randomized into two groups; group A (86 patients) without drainage and group B (87 patients) with drainage. Group B included two types of patients; B1 (52 patients) with suction drain and B2 (35 patients) with gravity drain. Evidence of wound infection, chest complications, and duration of hospital stay were recorded in every case. Ninety five patients were assessed for chest complications and subhepatic collection by chest x-ray and abdominal ultrasonography. In group B patients the total amount of fluid drained was measured. The results were analysed by appropriate statistical methods. There was no significant difference in the rate of wound infection or atelectasis in either group, although there was apparent increase of lung complications and subhepatic collections in Group B1. The average postoperative hospital stay was significantly increased in group B patients. Considering all the parameters of this study, it was found that drainage with gravity was attended with the least morbidity. A prospective controlled trial of drainage after cholecystectomy has been carried out. In a consecutive series of 143 patients undergoing cholecystectomy, 50 patients were randomly allocated to a drainage group and a further 50 patients to a non-drainage group. The remaining 43 patients were drained electively because the common bile duct was explored or because of infection or incomplete haemostasis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of wound infection or other complications between the drainage and the non-drainage groups. The duration of postoperative pyrexia, the number of analgesic injections and the length of postoperative hospital stay were the same in both the randomized groups. One patient in the randomized drainage group had a reactionary haemorrhage from the drain site requiring transfusion. There was no mortality but one patient in the elective drainage group had to be re-explored for a subhepatic abscess. Three patients in this group drained bile from the drain for 3-9 days but all had a T tube in place. This trial fails to demonstrate any advantage or disadvantage in draining the gallbladder bed after cholecystectomy. Drainage after cholecystectomy remains routine despite the lack of scientific supportive data. Numerous clinical studies in the past have attempted to address this controversy but have failed to resolve the issue for different reasons. These include retrospective design, inclusion of only selected cases, and randomization before surgery. In this study 479 patients undergoing cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to a drainage group (a high-pressure suction drain in Morison's pouch for 48 hours) or a nondrainage group. Randomization was performed at the time of peritoneal closure. All patients undergoing cholecystectomy, both elective and urgent, were included and the operations were performed by all grades of surgeons. There were two deaths from cardiopulmonary causes, both in the drainage group. No patient required reoperation in either group. The incidence of both wound infections (15 vs 5; p less than 0.05) and chest infections (56 vs 19, p less than 0.02) was significantly higher in the drainage group. Three hundred fifty-six patients underwent abdominal ultrasonography 72 hours after surgery. The number of subhepatic fluid collections thus detected was significantly higher in the patients who received a drain (17 vs 6, p less than 0.05). None of these collections was clinically significant. The postoperative hospital stay was longer in the patients with drains (10.3 vs 9.1 days), but this difference failed to reach statistical significance. We conclude from this study that the use of a drain after cholecystectomy serves no useful purpose and is potentially harmful. This practice should be abandoned. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting. Pneumoperitoneum created during the operation and residual gas after the operation are two of the factors in postoperative pain and nausea. We studied the effects of a subdiaphragmatic gas drain, which is intended to decrease the residual gas, on postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
                Seventy patients were randomized into two demographically and clinically comparable groups: drainage and control. Postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting were measured by verbal grading and visual analog scale 2-72 h postoperatively. Analgesic and antiemetic use and incidence of retching, vomiting and other complaints were also recorded.
                Subdiaphragmatic drain effectively reduced the incidence and amount of subdiaphragmatic gas bubble. The incidence and severity of nausea was lower in the drainage group at 72 h. Although severity of pain was lower at 8 and 12 h in the drainage group, the difference was not significant. There was also no difference between the groups in regard to analgesic and antiemetic use.
                Subdiaphragmatic drain offers only minor, if any, benefit on postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and this effect is probably clinically irrelevant. A prospective trial is described in which simple tube drainage was compared with suction drainage after cholecystectomy. Postoperative chest infection and infected or painful drain wounds were both significantly more common with simple tube drains. Postoperative discomfort was more frequent with tube drains in situ and wound infection more common in the suction group, but neither of these differences was statistically significant. The mean volume of fluid drained and duration of hospital stay did not differ between methods. It is concluded that both methods are satisfactory, but suction drainage is recommended. One hundred and fifty patients were prospectively randomised into 3 groups (50 in each group); to receive a passive drain, closed suction drain or no drain after elective cholecystectomy. The drain was removed within 24 hours in 84% of patients and was continued longer only if the amount of drainage was excessive or bilious. On the 3rd post-operative day, an ultrasound examination was performed in all patients for detection of subhepatic/subphrenic collection. Collections were more frequently encountered in the patients without any drain (42%) followed by passive drain (26%) and suction drain group (20%). Chest complications were frequently noted (passive drain; 6% suction drain, 12%, and no drain, 8%), however, occurrence of this complication in various groups was similar (p > 0.1). Two patients (4%) without drain required ultrasound guided aspiration of subhepatic collection. Mean post-operative hospital stay was nearly equal for all the groups (passive drain: 4.22 +/- 1 days, suction drain: 4.26 +/- 1.4 days and no drain: 4.62 +/- 2.3 days). Drainage reduced the incidence of post-cholecystectomy collections and need for invasive intervention for collection related complications. However, the type of drainage (active or passive) did not influence the incidence of collection, frequency of complications and duration of post-operative hospital stay. We performed a large single-center prospective randomized controlled study to assess the role of peritoneal drainage in simple elective cholecystectomy. In 248 patients, drains were omitted; 122 patients had closed suction drains and 124 had Penrose drains. There were no deaths, and no patient required reoperation or drainage of a subhepatic collection. Wound infections occurred in eight patients with drains and in six patients without. Most infections were staphylococcal. Postoperative pulmonary complications and hospital stays were similar in patients with and without drains. Statistical analysis of the 10 available prospective controlled randomized studies (1,920 patients) by the method of odds ratios supported our findings. Simple elective cholecystectomy is safe without peritoneal drainage, but short-term drains do not increase morbidity. One hundred eighty-four patients who underwent biliary surgery were randomly allocated to four groups arranaed in a 2 by 2 design. In 92 patients the drain was brought out through the wound and in the other 92 through a stab incision. In half of the patients in each group the drain was connected to a suction system and in the other half to a sterile bag. Suction was found to impair rather than enhance intraperitoneal drainage. In patients who underwent elective cholecystectomy and early operation for acute cholecystitis, the amount of discharge was more than twice as large when suction was omitted than when it was applied. After common duct operations the amount of discharge was very large and there was little difference in cases with and without suction. Prolonged drainage, static or suction, resulted in an increase in the serum haptoglobin level. Analysis of out data suggested that after a few days the drain starts to act as a traumatic stimulus. No difference was found between cases with the drain brought out through a stab incision and those with the drain brought out through the main wound. A number of studies have ascertained the superiority of closed to open drainage. The results of the present trial lead us to recommend that after biliary surgery the closed us to recommend that after biliary surgery the closed drain should not be connected to a suction apparatus and that after elective cholecystectomy the drain should preferably be removed after a few days.
Drain use after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy increases wound infection rates and delays hospital discharge. We could not find evidence to support the use of drain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.