Suppr超能文献

肝切除术后放弃预防性腹腔引流:在术后加速康复环境下10年的无引流策略

Abandoning Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage after Hepatic Surgery: 10 Years of No-Drain Policy in an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Environment.

作者信息

Wong-Lun-Hing Edgar M, van Woerden Victor, Lodewick Toine M, Bemelmans Marc H A, Olde Damink Steven W M, Dejong Cornelis H C, van Dam Ronald M

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC), Maastricht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Dig Surg. 2017;34(5):411-420. doi: 10.1159/000455246. Epub 2017 Mar 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Routine prophylactic abdominal drainage after hepatic surgery is still being debated, as it may be unnecessary, possibly harmful, and uncomfortable for patients. This study evaluated the safety of a no-drain policy after liver resection within an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) programme.

METHODS

All hepatectomies performed without prophylactic drainage during 2005-2014 were included. Primary end points were resection-surface-related (RSR) morbidity, defined as the presence of postoperative biloma, hemorrhage or abscess, and reinterventions. Secondary end points were length of stay, total postoperative morbidity, the composite end point of liver surgery-specific complications, readmissions, and 90-day mortality. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for RSR morbidity. A systematic search was performed to compare the results of this study to literature.

RESULTS

A total of 538 resections were included in the study. The RSR complication and reintervention rate was 15 and 12%, respectively. Major liver resection (≥3 segments) was an independent risk factor for the development of RSR morbidity (OR 3.01, 95% CI 1.61-5.62; p = 0.001) and need for RSR reintervention (OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.59-5.73; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RSR morbidity, mortality, and reintervention rates after liver surgery without prophylactic drainage in patients, treated within an ERAS programme, were comparable to previously published data. A no-drain policy after partial hepatectomy seems safe and feasible.

摘要

背景

肝切除术后常规预防性腹腔引流仍存在争议,因为这可能是不必要的,对患者可能有害且会带来不适。本研究评估了在术后加速康复(ERAS)计划下肝切除术后不置引流管策略的安全性。

方法

纳入2005年至2014年间所有未行预防性引流的肝切除术。主要终点为切除面相关(RSR)并发症,定义为术后胆汁瘤、出血或脓肿的存在以及再次干预。次要终点为住院时间、术后总并发症发生率、肝手术特异性并发症的复合终点、再入院率和90天死亡率。进行单因素和多因素分析以确定RSR并发症的独立危险因素。进行系统检索以将本研究结果与文献进行比较。

结果

本研究共纳入538例切除术。RSR并发症和再次干预率分别为15%和12%。大范围肝切除(≥3个肝段)是发生RSR并发症(比值比3.01,95%可信区间1.61 - 5.62;p = 0.001)和需要进行RSR再次干预(比值比3.02,95%可信区间1.59 - 5.73;p = 0.001)的独立危险因素。

结论

在ERAS计划下接受治疗的患者,肝切除术后未进行预防性引流时的RSR并发症、死亡率和再次干预率与先前发表的数据相当。部分肝切除术后不置引流管的策略似乎是安全可行的。

相似文献

2
Predictors of the Effectiveness of Prophylactic Drains After Hepatic Resection.
World J Surg. 2015 Oct;39(10):2543-9. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3116-3.
3
Image-guided Percutaneous Drainage for Treatment of Post-Surgical Anastomotic Leak in Patients with Crohn's Disease.
J Crohns Colitis. 2016 Jan;10(1):38-42. doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjv173. Epub 2015 Sep 27.
4
Is routine abdominal drainage necessary after liver resection?
Surg Today. 2017 Jun;47(6):712-717. doi: 10.1007/s00595-016-1432-3. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
7
Value of primary operative drain placement after major hepatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis of 1,041 patients.
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Apr;220(4):396-402. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.029. Epub 2015 Jan 2.
8
Management of Abdominal Drainage after Hepatic Resection.
Dig Surg. 2017;34(5):400-410. doi: 10.1159/000455238. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
9
Role of Drain Placement in Major Hepatectomy: A NSQIP Analysis of Procedure-Targeted Hepatectomy Cases.
World J Surg. 2017 Apr;41(4):1110-1118. doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3750-4.

引用本文的文献

2
Failure of enhanced recovery after surgery in liver surgery: a systematic review and meta analysis.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Jul 11;10:1159960. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1159960. eCollection 2023.
3
Risk factors and outcomes for cholangitis after hepatic resection.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Jun 17;408(1):236. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-02769-9.
5
A critical appraisal of the ISGLS definition of biliary leakage after liver resection.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Feb 3;408(1):77. doi: 10.1007/s00423-022-02746-8.
6
THERE ARE NO ADVANTAGES BETWEEN LAPAROSCOPIC AND OPEN LIVER RESECTIONS WITHIN AN ENHANCED RECOVERY PROGRAM (ERAS).
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2021 Oct 15;34(2):e1593. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020210002e1593. eCollection 2021.
8
ENHANCED RECOVERY (ERAS) AFTER LIVER SURGERY:COMPARATIVE STUDY IN A BRAZILIAN TERCIARY CENTER.
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2019 Feb 7;32(1):e1424. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020180001e1424.

本文引用的文献

2
The role of peri-hepatic drain placement in liver surgery: a prospective analysis.
HPB (Oxford). 2014 Oct;16(10):936-42. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12310. Epub 2014 Jul 16.
3
Enhanced recovery following liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
HPB (Oxford). 2014 Aug;16(8):699-706. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12245. Epub 2014 Mar 24.
4
Using a 'no drain' policy in 342 laparoscopic hepatectomies: which factors predict failure?
HPB (Oxford). 2014 May;16(5):494-9. doi: 10.1111/hpb.12165. Epub 2013 Aug 29.
5
Randomized clinical trial on enhanced recovery versus standard care following open liver resection.
Br J Surg. 2013 Jul;100(8):1015-24. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9165. Epub 2013 May 21.
6
A systematic review of outcomes in patients undergoing liver surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery pathways.
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Apr;15(4):245-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00572.x. Epub 2012 Sep 28.
7
Evaluation of a fast-track programme for patients undergoing liver resection.
Br J Surg. 2013 Jan;100(1):138-43. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8996. Epub 2012 Nov 20.
8
Incidence and risks of liver resection: an all-inclusive French nationwide study.
Ann Surg. 2012 Nov;256(5):697-704; discussion 704-5. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827241d5.
9
Criteria for drain removal following liver resection.
Br J Surg. 2012 Nov;99(11):1584-90. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8916.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验