CORE
🇺🇦
make metadata, not war
Services
Research
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Community governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
The Use of a Closed-Suction Drain in Revision Knee Arthroplasty May Not Be Necessary: A Prospective Randomized Study
Authors
M. Abolghasemian
D.J. Backstein
+4 more
M. Drexler
T.W. Huether
M.P. MacDonald
L.J. Soever
Publication date
1 January 2016
Publisher
Abstract
Background: The benefit of suction drains (SD) for the first 24-48 hours following joint replacement surgery is controversial. We aimed to determine if there is any difference in the early outcome of revision TKA when performed with, or without SD. Methods: 83 cases indicated for revision knee arthroplasty were randomized to receive (42) or not receive (41) a deep intra-articlular drain. First-stage revisions for treating periprosthetic infection were excluded. Patients were statistically compared for demographic parameters, early complications and early knee functional outcome. The assessed outcomes included total blood loss, number of transfusions, fever and wound complication rate at 24 months follow-up. In addition, the change in knee society score at 12 weeks postoperatively was compared between the groups. Results: There were no significant difference in demographic factors, wound complications, knee scores at 12 weeks and infection rate 24 months after surgery in either group. Average blood loss was 1856ml and 1533ml for the drain and no drain groups, respectively (P value=0.0470). The need for transfusion was significantly less in the no-drain group with an average of 0.15 unit/patient as compared to an average 0.37 unit/patient for the drain group (P value=0.0432). Conclusion: We were unable to find a point of superiority for using a drain for revision knee arthroplasty. Future studies with longer follow-up and larger population of patients are needed to make a valid conclusion. © 2016 Elsevier Inc
Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
eprints Iran University of Medical Sciences
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:eprints.iums.ac.ir:3496
Last time updated on 10/10/2019