Is there still a need for prophylactic intra-abdominal drainage in elective major gastro-intestinal surgery?

SummaryProphylactic drainage of the abdominal cavity after gastro-intestinal surgery is widely used. The rationale is that intra-abdominal drainage enhances early detection of complications (gastro-intestinal leakage, hemorrhage, bile leak), prevents collection of fluid or pus, reduces morbidity and mortality, and decreases the duration of hospital stay. However, dogmatic attitudes favoring systematic drain placement should be questioned. The aim of this review was to evaluate the evidence supporting systematic use of prophylactic abdominal drainage following gastrectomy, pancreatectomy, liver resection, and rectal resection. Based on this review of the literature: (i) there was no evidence in favor of intra-peritoneal drainage following total or sub-total gastrectomy with respect to morbidity-mortality, nor was it helpful in the diagnosis or management of leakage, however the level of evidence is low, (ii) following pancreatic resection, data are conflicting but, overall, suggest that the absence of drainage is prejudicial, and support the notion that short-term drainage is better than long-term drainage, (iii) after liver resection without hepatico-intestinal anastomosis, high level evidence supports that there is no need for abdominal drainage, and (iv) following rectal resection, data are insufficient to establish recommendations. However, results from the French multicenter randomized controlled trial GRECCAR5 (NCT01269567) should provide new evidence this coming year. Accumulating data support that systematic drainage of the abdominal cavity in digestive surgery is a non-beneficial and obsolete practice, except following pancreatectomy where the consensus appears to indicate the usefulness of short-term drainage. While the level of evidence is high for liver resections, new randomized controlled trials are awaited regarding gastric, pancreatic and rectal surgery

Functional outcomes in symptomatic versus asymptomatic patients undergoing incisional hernia repair: Replacing one problem with another? A prospective cohort study in 1312 patients

Background: Incisional hernias can be associated with pain or discomfort. Surgical repair especially mesh reinforcement, may likewise induce pain. The primary objective was to assess the incidence of pain after hernia repair in patients with and without pre-operative pain or discomfort. The secondary objectives were to determine the preferred mesh type, mesh location and surgical technique in minimizing postoperative pain or discomfort. Materials and methods: A registry-based prospective cohort study was performed, including patients undergoing incisional hernia repair between September 2011 and May 2019. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 3–6 months were included. The incidence of hernia related pain and discomfort was recorded perioperatively. Results: A total of 1312 patients were included. Pre-operatively, 1091 (83%) patients reported pain or discomfort. After hernia repair, 961 (73%) patients did not report pain or discomfort (mean follow-up = 11.1 months). Of the pre-operative asymptomatic patients (n = 221), 44 (20%, moderate or severe pain: n = 14, 32%) reported pain or discomfort after mean follow-up of 10.5 months. Of those patients initially reporting pain or discomfort (n = 1091), 307 (28%, moderate or severe pain: n = 80, 26%) still reported pain or discomfort after a mean follow-up of 11.3 months postoperatively. Conclusion: In symptomatic incisional hernia patients, hernia related complaints may be resolved in the majority of cases undergoing surgical repair. In asymptomatic incisional hernia patients, pain or discomfort may be induced in a considerable number of patients due to surgical repair and one should be aware if this postoperative complication

Day case appendectomy in adults: A review

AbstractBackgroundDay-case appendectomy (DCA) for acute appendicitis has been suggested as a valuable alternative to traditional appendectomy but many surgeons are reluctant to apply this technique in adults. The aim of the present review is to discuss the feasibility of DCA in adults.MethodsThree reviewers independently searched the Pubmed and Embase databases for articles on DCA. They then considered the criteria applicable to the surgery, day-case surgery, time taken for patients to resume normal activities, mean time to resumption of work and patient satisfaction.ResultsBetween 1993 and 2012, 13 studies (with retrospective (n = 8), prospective (n = 4) or case-control study (n = 1) designs) dealt with DCA. A total of 1152 adults underwent DCA. 312 patients (27.08%) were discharged within 12 h, 614 (53.29%) within 24 h and 242 (21.01%) within 72 h.ConclusionThe few data reported in 13 studies, suggest that DCA may be feasible. However prospective studies are needed before DCA can be recommended

Primary Anastomosis for Perforated Diverticulitis with Peritonitis: Post-hoc Pooled Analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials.

The impact of specific interventions at resection with primary anastomosis (PRA) for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis is controversial. The aim of this pooled analysis was to determine whether any specific interventions performed at resection with primary anastomosis in patients with perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis influenced the outcomes

Prognostic value of jaundice in patients with gallbladder cancer by the AFC-GBC-2009 study group

International audienceJaundice is frequent in patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC) and indicates advanced disease and, according to some teams, precludes routine operative exploration. The present study was designed to re-assess the prognostic value of jaundice in patients with GBC