Cheng Yao, Zhou Shiyi, Zhou Rongxing, Lu Jiong, Wu Sijia, Xiong Xianze, Ye Hui, Lin Yixin, Wu Taixiang, Cheng Nansheng
Department of BileDuct Surgery,WestChinaHospital, SichuanUniversity,Chengdu,China.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 7(2):CD010168. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010168.pub2.
Appendectomy, the surgical removal of the appendix, is performed primarily for acute appendicitis. Patients who undergo appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, defined as gangrenous or perforated appendicitis, are more likely to suffer from postoperative complications. The routine use of abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis is controversial.
To assess the safety and efficacy of abdominal drainage to prevent intra-peritoneal abscess after open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.
We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2014), MEDLINE (1950 to February 2014), EMBASE (1974 to February 2014), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to February 2014), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to February 2014).
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage and no drainage in patients undergoing emergency open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.
Two review authors identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias independently. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
We included five trials involving 453 patients with complicated appendicitis who were randomised to the drainage group (n = 228) and the no drainage group (n = 225) after emergency open appendectomies. All of the trials were at a high risk of bias. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the rates of intra-peritoneal abscess or wound infection. The hospital stay was longer in the drainage group than in the no drainage group (MD 2.04 days; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.62) (34.4% increase of an 'average' hospital stay).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the current evidence is very low. It is not clear whether routine abdominal drainage has any effect on the prevention of intra-peritoneal abscess after open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis. Abdominal drainage after an emergency open appendectomy may be associated with delayed hospital discharge for patients with complicated appendicitis.
阑尾切除术,即手术切除阑尾,主要用于治疗急性阑尾炎。因复杂性阑尾炎(定义为坏疽性或穿孔性阑尾炎)而接受阑尾切除术的患者更易出现术后并发症。对于复杂性阑尾炎阑尾切除术后常规使用腹腔引流以减少术后并发症,这一做法存在争议。
评估复杂性阑尾炎开腹阑尾切除术后腹腔引流预防腹腔脓肿的安全性和有效性。
我们检索了考克兰图书馆(2014年第1期)、医学期刊数据库(1950年至2014年2月)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(1974年至2014年2月)、科学引文索引扩展版(1900年至2014年2月)以及中国生物医学文献数据库(1978年至2014年2月)。
我们纳入了所有比较复杂性阑尾炎急诊开腹阑尾切除术后腹腔引流与不引流的随机对照试验(RCT)。
两位综述作者确定纳入的试验,收集数据,并独立评估偏倚风险。我们使用RevMan 5进行荟萃分析。对于二分结局,我们计算风险比(RR)(对于极罕见结局计算Peto比值比),对于连续结局计算均差(MD)并给出95%置信区间(CI)。
我们纳入了5项试验,共453例复杂性阑尾炎患者,在急诊开腹阑尾切除术后被随机分为引流组(n = 228)和不引流组(n = 225)。所有试验均存在高偏倚风险。两组在腹腔脓肿或伤口感染发生率方面无显著差异。引流组的住院时间比不引流组长(MD 2.04天;95% CI 1.46至2.62)(“平均”住院时间增加34.4%)。
当前证据质量极低。尚不清楚复杂性阑尾炎开腹阑尾切除术后常规腹腔引流对预防腹腔脓肿是否有任何效果。复杂性阑尾炎患者急诊开腹阑尾切除术后进行腹腔引流可能与住院时间延长有关。