Drainage at caesarean section--a randomised prospective study. Closed suction wound drainage and lower-segment caesarean section. A controlled trial on wound drainage in caesarean section. No benefit from post-caesarean wound drainage. Subcutaneous stitch closure versus subcutaneous drain to prevent wound disruption after cesarean delivery: a randomized clinical trial. Subcutaneous drain vs. suture in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery. A prospective, randomized trial. Value of subcutaneous drainage system in obese females undergoing cesarean section using pfannenstiel incision. Subcutaneous tissue reapproximation, alone or in combination with drain, in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery. A prospective, controlled study of prophylactic drainage after colonic anastomoses.
To determine the efficacy of wound drainage at caesarean section with a view to reducing postoperative wound morbidity.
                King Edward VIII Hospital, Durban, South Africa.
                Four hundred and forty women undergoing emergency caesarean section using the transverse suprapubic incision were randomised to receive either drainage or non-drainage of the wound. Wound drains were removed 48 hours after surgery and patients were seen daily until the time of discharge from hospital. Wound inflammation, wound infection and duration of hospital stay were assessed in both groups.
                Seventy-two of the 440 patients (16.4%) developed wound morbidity ranging from induration, serous, sanguinous and purulent discharge to haematoma formation and wound dehiscence. Of the 217 patients who received drains, 37 showed evidence of wound morbidity (17.1%), as opposed to 35 of the 223 who were not drained (15.7%) (P = 0.701).
                No significant advantages could be demonstrated for routine drainage in terms of wound inflammation, wound infection, haematoma formation or duration of hospital stay. In a randomized controlled study of wound suction drainage after transverse suprapubic incision for lower-segment caesarean section no significant advantages could be demonstrated for routine drainage in terms of wound infection, haematoma formation, duration of hospital stay or analgesic requirements. A randomized controlled trial was carried out to investigate the influence of drainage on wound infection following Caesarean section. The incidence of clinical wound infection was significantly reduced if a Redivac suction drain was placed beneath the rectus sheath. Subcutaneous corrugated drains were found to offer no advantage. Three different degrees of postoperative pyrexia are examined for their predictive value for the development of wound sepsis. The influence of duration of amnion rupture and the number of vaginal examinations in labour on the postoperative incidence of wound infection and pyrexia are examined. A prospective randomized controlled trial to determine the benefit of caesarean wound drainage in 305 low-risk pregnant women.
                Pregnant women at low risk of haemorrhage undergoing caesarean section in the Department of Obstetrics, University Hospital, Zurich, between June 1998 and July 1999 were randomised after informed consent into a no-suction group (n = 154) without post-caesarean wound drainage versus a control group with wound drainage (subfascial and subcutaneous) (n = 151). Outcome measures were perioperative decrease in haemoglobin (Hb), postpartum fever (> 38.5 degrees C for > 2 days), sonographic haematoma and other complications requiring revision, cumulative opiate dose adjusted to body weight, length of hospitalisation and operation time.
                305 patients completed the study. Decrease in Hb and the rates of fever, haematoma and revision were similar in both groups. However, cumulative opiate dose was lower in the no-suction group (4.5 +/- 1.8 vs 2.8 +/- 1.4 injections, p = 0.0001), and hospital stay was shorter (6.5 +/- 2.4 vs 7.4 +/- 2.8 days, p = 0.0058), as was operation time (32.7 +/- 11.3 v 36.1 +/- 10.5 min; p = 0.0071).
                Routine post-caesarean wound drainage is not only useless but cost-ineffective. In the light of our results, wound drainage may be questioned and should be analysed generally. The purpose of this study was to compare a subcutaneous stitch closure and subcutaneous drain placement for the risk of wound disruption after cesarean delivery.
                This was a prospective randomized clinical trial that evaluated subcutaneous stitch closure, placement of a subcutaneous drain, or no closure for subsequent wound disruption risk in women with subcutaneous depth at >or=2 cm.
                The maternal demographics and intrapartum risk factors for postoperative wound disruptions were similar among the 964 study subjects, who were divided into 3 groups. Wound disruptions that required opening of the wound, irrigation, debridement, packing, and/or secondary delayed closure occurred in 9.7% of the women with no closure, 10.4% of the women in the stitch closure group, and 10.3% of the women in the closed drain group (P =.834).
                There appears to be no difference in the subsequent risk of wound complications when no closure of the subcutaneous tissue layers occurs versus suture closure or a closed drainage system. To determine if subcutaneous drain or closure of the subcutaneous layer decreases the incidence of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery.
                Seventy-six obese women undergoing cesarean delivery and with at least 2 cm of subcutaneous fat were randomized to one of three groups: group 1 had suture closure of the subcutaneous tissue, group 2 had placement of a subcutaneous closed suction drain, and group 3 had neither suture closure nor drainage.
                Wound separation occurred in 12 (15.8%), seroma in 5 (6.6%) and infection in 3 (4%). There were no reports of wound hematoma. The overall incidence of any wound complication (infection, separation, seroma, hematoma) was higher in obese women who received neither subcutaneous suture nor drain as compared to obese women who received either subcutaneous suture closure or subcutaneous drain. The incidence of major wound complications (infection or separation) was also higher in obese women who received neither subcutaneous suture or drain compared to obese women who received either subcutaneous suture closure or subcutaneous drain.
                The use of closed suction drainage in the subcutaneous space may reduce the incidence of postoperative wound complications in obese women who have at least 2 cm of subcutaneous fat and undergo cesarean delivery. To determine whether closed subcutaneous drainage systems were efficacious in reducing the rate of wound breakdown of Pfannenstiel incision after cesarean section (CS) in obese females.
                Prospective controlled clinical trial.
                118 obese pregnant females with a body mass index >32 undergoing CS were divided into two groups: group I (n = 78) with closed subcutaneous drainage system and group II (n = 40) without drainage system. Incision closure technique was standardized. Prophylactic antibiotics were given routinely to both groups.
                Primary outcomes were the incidence of wound breakdown in both groups together with rate of hematoma formation and occurrence of fever. Secondary outcomes were amount of fluid drained, need for redressing.
                Wound breakdown occurred in 9 cases in group I (11.5%), while it happened in 5 cases in group II (12.5%) (p > 0.05). Relative risk was 0.92 (95% CI 0.26-3.75). Hematoma formation was observed in only 1 case in the nondrainage group (group II). Fever was observed in 18 cases in group I (23.1%) in the first 24 h postoperative while in group II, 13 cases developed fever (32.5%) (p > 0.05). The need for redressing within the first 24 h was only in 2.5% of cases in group I while it was 17.9% in group II (p < 0.05).
                We found no significant benefit in using a subcutaneous drain as a prophylactic measure against wound breakdown in obese pregnant females undergoing CS as long as they received a prophylactic antibiotic.
                Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel To compare the efficacy of subcutaneous suture reapproximation alone with suture plus subcutaneous drain for the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery.
                We conducted a multicenter randomized trial of women undergoing cesarean delivery. Consenting women with 4 cm or more of subcutaneous thickness were randomized to either subcutaneous suture closure alone (n = 149) or suture plus drain (n = 131). The drain was attached to bulb suction and removed at 72 hours or earlier if output was less than 30 mL/24 h. The primary study outcome was a composite wound morbidity rate (defined by any of the following: subcutaneous tissue dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, abscess, or fascial dehiscence).
                From April 2001 to July 2004, a total of 280 women were enrolled. Ninety-five percent of women (268/280) had a follow-up wound assessment. Both groups were similar with respect to age, race, parity, weight, cesarean indication, diabetes, steroid/antibiotic use, chorioamnionitis, and subcutaneous thickness. The composite wound morbidity rate was 17.4% (25/144) in the suture group and 22.7% (28/124) in the suture plus drain group (relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.8-2.1). Individual wound complication rates, including subcutaneous dehiscence (15.3% versus 21.8%), seroma (9.0% versus 10.6%), hematoma (2.2% versus 2.4%), abscess (0.7% versus 3.3%), fascial dehiscence (1.4% versus 1.7%), and hospital readmission for wound complications (3.5% versus 6.6%), were similar (P > .05) between women treated with suture alone and those treated with suture plus drain, respectively.
                The additional use of a subcutaneous drain along with a standard subcutaneous suture reapproximation technique is not effective for the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was designed to study the influence of a corrugated latex drain on anastomotic integrity, wound infection, and respiratory complications after elective colonic resections above the pelvic peritoneum. Sixty patients entered the trial; 28 were drained and 32 undrained. Three patients in the undrained group died soon after surgery of causes unrelated to their colon anastomoses. There were no other differences in the incidence of postoperative complications in the two groups. When an anastomosis leaked, neither feces nor pus emerged via the drain. It is concluded that while the drains did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications, neither did they accomplish the purpose for which they were inserted. If, in addition, the economic cost of drainage is considered, it would seem that there is no advantage in inserting prophylactic drains after colonic anastomoses and their routine use needs to be reconsidered.
At present there is no evidence that the routine use of wound drains at caesarean section confers any benefit to the women involved. However, neither moderate benefit nor harm are excluded. These trials do not answer the question of whether wound drainage is of benefit when haemostasis is not felt to be adequate. Further large trials comparing drainage with no drain are justified.