Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37594637›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024

Drain versus no drain in elective open incisional hernia operations: a registry-based analysis with 39,523 patients.

M Sahm, M Pross, M Hukauf, D Adolf, F Köckerling, R Mantke

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Comment to: Drain versus no drain in elective open incisional hernia operations.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

M SahmClinic for General and Visceral Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, Hochstraße 29, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany. Maik.Sahm@mhb-fontane.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9134-1884
M ProssDepartment of Surgery, DRK Kliniken Berlin Köpenick, Salvador Allende Str. 2-8, 12557, Berlin, Germany.
M HukaufStatConsult GmbH, Am Fuchsberg 11, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany.
D AdolfStatConsult GmbH, Am Fuchsberg 11, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany.
F KöckerlingHernia Center, Vivantes Humboldt Hospital, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité, University Medicine, Am Nordgraben 2, 13509, Berlin, Germany.
R MantkeClinic for General and Visceral Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, Hochstraße 29, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany.
InfoConsult (Germany) · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEDRK Kliniken Berlin · DEMedizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane · DEUniversitätsklinikum Brandenburg an der Havel · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeElective open incisional hernia operations are a frequently performed and complex procedure. Prophylactic drainage is widely practised to prevent local complications, but nevertheless the benefit of surgical drain placement remains a controversially discussed subject. Objective of this analysis was to evaluate the current status of patient care in clinical routine and outcome in this regard.

methodsThe study based on prospectively collected data of the Herniamed Register. Included were all patients with elective open incisional hernia between 1/2005 and 12/2020 and completed 1-year follow-up. Multiple linear and logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the relation of individual factors to the outcome variables.

resultsAnalysed were data from 39,523 patients (28,182 with drain, 11,341 without). Patients with drain placement were significantly older, had a higher BMI, more preoperative risk factors, and a larger defect size. Drained patients furthermore showed a significant disadvantage in the outcome parameters intraoperative complications, general complications, postoperative complications, complication-related reoperations, and pain at the 1-year follow-up. No significant difference was observed with respect to the recurrent rate.

conclusionWith 71.3%, the use of surgical drainages has a high level of acceptance in elective open incisional hernia operations. The worse outcome of patients is associated with the use of drains, independent of other influencing factors in the model such as patient or surgical characteristics. The use of drains may be a surrogate parameter for other unobserved confounders.

Indexed as

DrainageElective Surgical ProceduresIncisional HerniaPostoperative ComplicationsRegistriesAdultAgedFemaleHerniorrhaphyHumansMaleMiddle AgedReoperationRisk FactorsDrainElective hernia operationsOpen incisional hernia repairOutcome

Identifiers

PMID37594637
PMCPMC11297118
OpenAlexW4385969020

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.