z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Drainage versus No Drainage after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis: A Meta-Analysis
Author(s) -
Ming Xu,
You-Liang Tao
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
the american surgeon
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.331
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1555-9823
pISSN - 0003-1348
DOI - 10.1177/000313481908500138
Subject(s) - drainage , acute cholecystitis , medicine , laparoscopic cholecystectomy , meta analysis , cholecystectomy , cholecystitis , general surgery , biliary drainage , surgery , gallbladder , biology , ecology
To conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT), meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of drains in reducing complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis needs to be carried out. An electronic search of PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library from January 1990 to January 2018 was performed to identify randomized clinical trials that compare prophylactic drainage with no drainage in LC for acute cholecystitis. The outcomes were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan 5.2. Four RCTs, which included 796 patients, were identified for analysis in our study. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of morbidities (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.55–2.76, P = 0.61). Abdominal pain was more severe in the drain group 24 hours after surgery (mean difference = 0.80, 95% CI 0.47–1.14; P < 0.00001). No significant difference was present with respect to wound infection rate and hospital stay. The use of abdominal drainage does not appear to be of any benefit in patients having undergone early LC for acute cholecystitis.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom