Kim Yang-Il, Hwang Yoon-Jin, Chun Jae-Min, Chun Byung-Yeol
Department of Surgery, Biomolecular Engineering Center, Liver Research Institute Kyungpook National University, School of Medicine, Taegu, Korea.
Hepatogastroenterology. 2007 Jul-Aug;54(77):1542-5.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Routine use of abdominal drainage after liver resection is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the practical application of a "no abdominal drainage" policy for consecutive patients undergoing hepatic resection.
The present trial included 60 consecutive patients who underwent elective hepatic resection. Fifty-two patients underwent no abdominal drainage, and in the remaining eight drainage was necessary because of gross contamination of the surgical field associated with bilioenteric anastomosis, uncontrollable bile leakage from the cut surface of the liver, or the surgeon's preference. Patient demographics, intraoperative data, and postoperative complications and mortality were evaluated.
There was no hospital death. Eight complications occurred in 8 patients in the no-drainage group (morbidity rate 15.4%, 8/52): bleeding, abscess, ascites requiring peritoneal tap, pleural effusion requiring thoracentesis, and pneumonia in one case each, and three cases of wound infection. Three complications were encountered in 2 patients in the drainage group (morbidity rate 25%, 2/8): bleeding, infected biloma and pleural effusion in one case each. Postoperative hospital stay tended to be shorter in the no-drainage group (10.7 +/- 3.9 days) than in the drainage group (15.6 +/- 6.4 days) (p = 0.07). Considering early uneventful removal of the drain on the morning of postoperative day 1, half of the drained patients might have not required drainage. Furthermore, in the setting of concomitant bilioenteric anastomosis (n=4), one patient underwent hepatectomy uneventfully without drainage, and two of three patients with drainage had their drains removed successfully on day 1. The third patient retained the drain for an unnecessarily long period, but did not develop subsequent complications.
Our data support the view that prophylactic abdominal drainage is unnecessary in most patients who undergo elective hepatic resection. Bilioenteric anastomosis may not be a contraindication for a no abdominal drainage policy.
背景/目的:肝切除术后常规使用腹腔引流存在争议。本研究的目的是调查“不放置腹腔引流”策略在连续接受肝切除患者中的实际应用情况。
本试验纳入了60例连续接受择期肝切除的患者。52例患者未放置腹腔引流,其余8例因手术野严重污染(与胆肠吻合相关)、肝脏切面不可控胆漏或外科医生的偏好而需要放置引流。评估了患者的人口统计学数据、术中数据以及术后并发症和死亡率。
无医院死亡病例。未放置引流组的8例患者出现了8种并发症(发病率15.4%,8/52):出血、脓肿、需要腹腔穿刺的腹水、需要胸腔穿刺的胸腔积液以及各1例肺炎,还有3例伤口感染。放置引流组的2例患者出现了3种并发症(发病率25%,2/8):出血、感染性胆汁瘤和各1例胸腔积液。未放置引流组的术后住院时间(10.7±3.9天)比放置引流组(15.6±6.4天)倾向于更短(p = 0.07)。考虑到术后第1天早上早期顺利拔除引流管,一半放置引流的患者可能本就不需要引流。此外,在伴有胆肠吻合的情况下(n = 4),1例患者未放置引流顺利接受了肝切除术,3例放置引流的患者中有2例在第1天成功拔除了引流管。第3例患者不必要地长时间保留了引流管,但未出现后续并发症。
我们的数据支持这样一种观点,即大多数接受择期肝切除的患者无需预防性腹腔引流。胆肠吻合可能不是不放置腹腔引流策略的禁忌证。