Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A prospective randomized controlled trial of subcutaneous passive drainage for the prevention of superficial surgical site infections in open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

A number of studies have evaluated the effects of subcutaneous drainage during digestive surgery. All of the previous studies assessed the usefulness of active-suctioning drain, including two randomized controlled studies which found no benefit for the placement of active-suctioning drains in digestive surgery. The utility of passive drainage has not been evaluated previously. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous passive drainage system for preventing surgical site infections during major colorectal surgery.

Patients and methods

A total of 263 patients who underwent major colorectal surgery were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous passive drainage or no drainage. The primary outcome measured was the incidence of superficial surgical site infections. The secondary outcomes measured were the development of hematomas, seromas, and wound dehiscence.

Results

Finally, a total of 246 patients (124 underwent passive drainage, and 122 underwent no drainage) were included in the analysis after randomization. There was a significant difference in the incidence of superficial surgical site infections between patients assigned to the passive drainage and no drainage groups (3.2 % vs 9.8 %, respectively, P = 0.041). There were no cases that developed a hematoma, seroma, or wound dehiscence in either group. A subgroup analysis revealed that male gender, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status ≥2, blood loss ≥100 ml, and open access were factors that were associated with a beneficial effect of subcutaneous passive drainage.

Conclusions

Subcutaneous passive drainage provides benefits over no drainage in patients undergoing major colorectal surgery.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Romy S, Eisenring MC, Bettschart V, Petignat C, Francioli P, Troillet N (2008) Laparoscope use and surgical site infections in digestive surgery. Ann Surg 247:627–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Leaper DJ, van Goor H, Reilly J, Petrosillo N, Geiss HK, Torres AJ, Berger A (2004) Surgical site infection—a European perspective of incidence and economic burden. Int Wound J 1:247–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Panici PB, Zullo MA, Casalino B, Angioli R, Muzii L (2003) Subcutaneous drainage versus no drainage after minilaparotomy in gynecologic benign conditions: a randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:71–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baier PK, Gluck NC, Baumgartner U, Adam U, Fischer A, Hopt UT (2010) Subcutaneous Redon drains do not reduce the incidence of surgical site infections after laparotomy. A randomized controlled trial on 200 patients. Int J Color Dis 25:639–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaya E, Paksoy E, Ozturk E, Sigirli D, Bilgel H (2010) Subcutaneous closed-suction drainage does not affect surgical site infection rate following elective abdominal operations: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Acta Chir Belg 110:457–462

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii T, Tabe Y, Yajima R, Yamaguchi S, Tsutsumi S, Asao T, Kuwano H (2011) Effects of subcutaneous drain for the prevention of incisional SSI in high-risk patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Int J Color Dis 26:1151–1155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pocock SJ, Simon R (1975) Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 31:103–115

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR (1999) Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control 27:97–132, quiz 133–134; discussion 196

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET, Carbone PP (1982) Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5:649–655

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Furukawa K, Onda M, Suzuki H, Maruyama H, Akiya Y, Ashikari M, Maezawa K, Tokunaga A, Tajiri T, Tanaka N, Yamasita K (1999) The usefulness of conducting investigations on intra-abdominal bacterial contamination in digestive tract operations. Surg Today 29:701–706

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chelmow D, Rodriguez EJ, Sabatini MM (2004) Suture closure of subcutaneous fat and wound disruption after cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 103:974–980

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vermillion ST, Lamoutte C, Soper DE, Verdeja A (2000) Wound infection after cesarean: effect of subcutaneous tissue thickness. Obstet Gynecol 95:923–926

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gallup DC, Gallup DG, Nolan TE, Smith RP, Messing MF, Kline KL (1996) Use of a subcutaneous closed drainage system and antibiotics in obese gynecologic patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:358–361, discussion 362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Al-Inany H, Youssef G, Abd ElMaguid A, Abdel Hamid M, Naguib A (2002) Value of subcutaneous drainage system in obese females undergoing cesarean section using Pfannenstiel incision. Gynecol Obstet Invest 53:75–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Durai R, Mownah A, Ng PC (2009) Use of drains in surgery: a review. J Perioper Pract 19:180–186

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Batstone MD, Lowe D, Shaw RJ, Brown JS, Vaughan ED, Rogers SN (2009) Passive versus active drainage following neck dissection: a non-randomised prospective study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:121–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Razavi SM, Ibrahimpoor M, Sabouri Kashani A, Jafarian A (2005) Abdominal surgical site infections: incidence and risk factors at an Iranian teaching hospital. BMC Surg 5:2

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Watanabe A, Kohnoe S, Shimabukuro R, Yamanaka T, Iso Y, Baba H, Higashi H, Orita H, Emi Y, Takahashi I, Korenaga D, Maehara Y (2008) Risk factors associated with surgical site infection in upper and lower gastrointestinal surgery. Surg Today 38:404–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Biscione FM, Couto RC, Pedrosa TM, Neto MC (2007) Factors influencing the risk of surgical site infection following diagnostic exploration of the abdominal cavity. J Infect 55:317–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Vaporciyan AA, Kies MS, Stevens CW (2003) Performance status. In: Kufe DW (ed) Holland-Frei cancer medicine, 6th edn. BC Decker, Ontario, p 302

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tsujita E, Yamashita Y, Takeishi K, Matsuyama A, Tsutsui S, Matsuda H, Taketomi A, Shirabe K, Ishida T, Maehara Y (2012) Subcuticular absorbable suture with subcutaneous drainage system prevents incisional SSI after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Surg 36:1651–1656

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Y. Ishida, S. Shibuya, and T. Ishibashi for their secretarial assistance.

Conflicts of interest

We declare that there is no conflict of interest and that the trial was done independently of the producer.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masakatsu Numata.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Numata, M., Godai, T., Shirai, J. et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial of subcutaneous passive drainage for the prevention of superficial surgical site infections in open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 29, 353–358 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-013-1810-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-013-1810-x

Keywords

Navigation