Skip to main content
Log in

To Drain or not to Drain? The Role of Drainage in the Contaminated and Infected Abdomen: An International and Personal Perspective

  • Editorial Perspective
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

References

  1. O’Connor TW, Hugh TB (1979) Abdominal drainage: a clinical review. Aust N Z J Surg 49:253–260

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gilas T, Schein M, Frykberg E (1998) A surgical Internet discussion list (Surginet): a novel venue for international communication among surgeons. Arch Surg 133:1126–1130

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Petrowsky H, Demartines N, Rousson V, et al. (2004) Evidence-based value of prophylactic drainage in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 204:1074–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wittmann DH, Schein M, Condon RE (1996) Management of secondary peritonitis. Ann Surg 224:10–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lewis RT, Goodall RG, Marien B, et al. (1990) Simple elective cholecystectomy: to drain or not. Am J Surg 159:241–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Askew J (2006) Survey of the current surgical treatment of gallstones in Queensland. Aust N Z J Surg 76:536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nursal TZ, Yildirim S, Tarim A, et al. (2003) Effect of drainage on postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain after. Langenbecks Arch Surg 388:95–100

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dominguez EP, Giammar D, Baumert J, et al. (2006) Prospective study of bile leaks after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Am Surg 72:265–268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pai D, Sharma A, Kanungo R, et al. (1999) Role of abdominal drains in perforated duodenal ulcer patients: a prospective controlled study. Aust N Z J Surg 69:210–213

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee YJ, Leung KL, Lai PBS, et al. (2001) Selection of patients for laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer. Br J Surg 88:133–136

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Urbach DR, Kennedy ED, Cohen MM (1999) Colon and rectal anastomoses do not require routine drainage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 229:174–180

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jesus EC, Karliczek A, Matos D, et al. (2004) Prophylactic anastomotic drainage for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18(4):CD002100

    Google Scholar 

  13. Surgery of the Anus, Rectum and Colon. Goligher Jc. Baillieae Tindal, London 1984

  14. Rotstein OD, Meakins JL (1999) Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of intraabdominal infections. World J Surg 14:159–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Broome AE, Hansson LC, Tyger JF (1983) Efficiency of various types drainage of the peritoneal cavity—an experimental study in man. Acta Chir Scand 149:53–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moshe Schein.

Additional information

This article was adapted from an Internet course on surgical infections by the Surgical Infection Society of Europe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schein, M. To Drain or not to Drain? The Role of Drainage in the Contaminated and Infected Abdomen: An International and Personal Perspective. World J Surg 32, 312–321 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9277-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9277-y

Keywords

Navigation