Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effectiveness and appropriate management of abdominal drains in patients undergoing elective liver resection: a retrospective analysis and prospective case series

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Although many studies have concluded that prophylactic drain insertion during elective liver resection offers few advantages, we reassessed the clinical value and appropriate management of drain insertion.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the clinical value of abdominal drainage in 167 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy, focusing on drainage volumes, bilirubin concentrations, drainage fluid bacterial culture results and short-term postoperative outcomes. The results were then validated prospectively in the next 50 consecutive patients to undergo hepatectomy.

Results

Most of the patients with morbidities such as biliary fistulas, ascites, fluid collection or duodenal perforation (20/24 or 83 %) were treated using operative drainage tubes, avoiding the use of percutaneous drainage procedures. The values obtained with the formula (drainage fluid bilirubin concentration/serum bilirubin concentration) × drainage fluid volume, were greater on both postoperative days (POD) 2 and 3 (P = 0.03 and P < 0.01) in patients with biliary leakage compared with those observed in the patients without leakage. The bacteriologic cultures of drainage fluid were positive less frequently on POD 4 or earlier (7/203) than on POD 5 or later (24/74, P < 0.01). In the validation cohort, new drain removal criteria based on the retrospective results led to successful drain management without additional treatment in 96 % of patients.

Conclusions

Abdominal drainage is effective for both postoperative monitoring and morbidity treatment.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CT:

Computed tomography

HCC:

Hepatocellular carcinoma

Hx:

Hepatectomy

LDLT:

Living donor liver transplant

MRSE:

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis

POD:

Postoperative day(s)

PS:

Prediction score

SE:

Standard error

SIRS:

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome

References

  1. Duthie HL. Drainage of the abdomen. N Engl J Med. 1972;287:1081–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cerise EJ, Pierce WA, Diamond DL. Abdominal drains: their role as a source of infection following splenectomy. Ann Surg. 1970;171:764–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith SRG, Gilmore OJA. Surgical drainage. Br J Hosp Med. 1985;33:308–15.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Benjamin PJ. Faeculent peritonitis: a complication of vacuum drainage. Br J Surg. 1980;67:453–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Elboim CM, Goldman L, Hann L, Palestrant AM, Silen W. Significance of post-cholecystectomy subhepatic fluid collections. Ann Surg. 1983;198:137–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Monson JR, MacFie J, Irving H, Keane FB, Brennan TG, Tanner WA. Influence of intraperitoneal drains on subhepatic collections following cholecystectomy: a prospective clinical trial. Br J Surg. 1986;73:993–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Koffi E, Moutardier V, Sauvanet A, Noun R, Fléjou JF, Belghiti J. Wound recurrence after resection of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl Surg. 1996;2:301–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Trowbridge PE. A randomized study of cholecystectomy with and without drainage. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1982;155:171–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoffmann J, Lorentzen M. Drainage after cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1985;72:423–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Belghiti J, Kabbej M, Sauvanet A, Vilgrain V, Panis Y, Fekete F. Drainage after elective hepatic resection. A randomized trial. Ann Surg. 1993;218:748–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fong Y, Brennan MF, Brown K, Heffernan N, Blumgart LH. Drainage is unnecessary after elective liver resection. Am J Surg. 1996;171:158–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu CL, Fan ST, Lo CM, Wong Y, Ng IO, Lam CM, et al. Abdominal drainage after hepatic resection is contraindicated in patients with chronic liver diseases. Ann Surg. 2004;239:194–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sun HC, Qin LX, Lu L, Wang L, Ye QH, Ren N, et al. Randomized clinical trial of the effects of abdominal drainage after elective hepatectomy using the crushing clamp method. Br J Surg. 2006;93:422–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Yamanaka N, Okamoto E, Oriyama T, Fujimoto J, Furukawa K, Kawamura E, et al. A prediction scoring system to select the surgical treatment of liver cancer. Further refinement based on 10 years of use. Ann Surg. 1994;219:342–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pringle JH. Notes on the arrest of hepatic hemorrhage due to trauma. Ann Surg. 1908;48:541–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Makuuchi M, Mori T, Gunvén P, Yamazaki S, Hasegawa H. Safety of hemihepatic vascular occlusion during resection of the liver. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1987;164:155–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Takasaki K, Kobayashi S, Tanaka S, Muto H, Watayo T. Highly selected hepatic resection by Glissonean sheath-binding method. Dig Surg. 1986;3:121.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Santiago Delpin EA, Figueroa I, Lopez R, Vazquez J. Protective effect of steroids on liver ischemia. Am Surg 1975;41:683–5.

    Google Scholar 

  19. The Brisbane 2000 Terminology of Liver Anatomy and Resection. Terminology Committee of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. HPB 2000;2:333–9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pachter HL, Hofstetter SR, Spencer FC. Evolving concepts in splenic surgery: splenorrhaphy versus splenectomy and postsplenectomy drainage: experience in 105 patients. Ann Surg. 1981;194:262–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Fuster J, Llovet JM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Grande L, Fondevila C, Vilana R, et al. Abdominal drainage after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients: a randomized controlled study. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004;51:536–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rosemurgy AS, Statman RC, Murphy CG, Albrink MH, McAllister EW. Postoperative ascitic leaks: the ongoing challenge. Surgery. 1992;111:623–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ronaghan JE, Miller SF, Finley RK Jr, Jones LM, Elliott DW. A statistical analysis of drainage versus nondrainage of elective cholecystectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1986;162:253–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bona S, Gavelli A, Huguet C. The role of abdominal drainage after major hepatic resection. Am J Surg. 1994;167:593–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Torzilli G, Olivari N, Del Fabbro D, Gambetti A, Leoni P, Gendarini A, et al. Bilirubin level fluctuation in drain discharge after hepatectomies justifies long-term drain maintenance. Hepatogastroenterology. 2005;52:1206–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Williams CB, Halpin DS, Knox AJ. Drainage following cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1972;59:293–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan

    Kuniya Tanaka, Takafumi Kumamoto, Kazunori Nojiri, Kazuhisa Takeda & Itaru Endo

Authors
  1. Kuniya Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takafumi Kumamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kazunori Nojiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kazuhisa Takeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Itaru Endo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kuniya Tanaka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tanaka, K., Kumamoto, T., Nojiri, K. et al. The effectiveness and appropriate management of abdominal drains in patients undergoing elective liver resection: a retrospective analysis and prospective case series. Surg Today 43, 372–380 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-012-0254-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-012-0254-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation