Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection

Kevin C. Conlon, Daniel Labow, Dennis Leung, Alex Smith, William Jarnagin, Daniel G. Coit, Nipun Merchant, Murray F. Brennan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

378 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To test the hypothesis that routine intraperitoneal drainage is not required after pancreatic resection. Summary Background Data: The use of surgically placed intraperitoneal drains has been considered routine after pancreatic resection. Recent studies have suggested that for other major upper abdominal resections, routine postoperative drainage is not required and may be associated with an increased complication rate. Methods: After informed consent, eligible patients with peripancreatic tumors were randomized during surgery either to have no drains placed or to have closed suction drainage placed in a standardized fashion after pancreatic resection. Clinical, pathologic, and surgical details were recorded. Results: One hundred seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the study, 90 women and 89 men. Mean age was 65.4 years (range 23-87). The pancreas was the tumor site in 142 (79%) patients, with the ampulla (n=24), duodenum (n=10), and distal common bile duct (n=3) accounting for the remainder. A pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 139 patients and a distal pancreatectomy in 40 cases. Eighty-eight patients were randomized to have drains placed. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic details were similar between both groups. The overall 30-day death rate was 2% (n=4). A postoperative complication occurred during the initial admission in 107 patients (59%). There was no significant difference in the number or type of complications between groups. In the drained group, 11 patients (12.5%) developed a pancreatic fistula. Patients with a drain were more likely to develop a significant intraabdominal abscess, collection, or fistula. Conclusion: This randomized prospective clinical trial failed to show a reduction in the number of deaths or complications with the addition of surgical intraperitoneal closed suction drainage after pancreatic resection. The data suggest that the presence of drains failed to reduce either the need for interventional radiologic drainage or surgical exploration for intraabdominal sepsis. Based on these results, closed suction drainage should not be considered mandatory or standard after pancreatic resection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)487-494
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume234
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Drainage
Randomized Controlled Trials
Suction
Pancreatic Fistula
Pancreatectomy
Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Common Bile Duct
Informed Consent
Duodenum
Abscess
Fistula
Pancreas
Neoplasms
Sepsis
Demography
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Conlon, K. C., Labow, D., Leung, D., Smith, A., Jarnagin, W., Coit, D. G., ... Brennan, M. F. (2001). Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection. Annals of Surgery, 234(4), 487-494. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200110000-00008

Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection. / Conlon, Kevin C.; Labow, Daniel; Leung, Dennis; Smith, Alex; Jarnagin, William; Coit, Daniel G.; Merchant, Nipun; Brennan, Murray F.

In: Annals of Surgery, Vol. 234, No. 4, 2001, p. 487-494.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Conlon, Kevin C. ; Labow, Daniel ; Leung, Dennis ; Smith, Alex ; Jarnagin, William ; Coit, Daniel G. ; Merchant, Nipun ; Brennan, Murray F. / Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection. In: Annals of Surgery. 2001 ; Vol. 234, No. 4. pp. 487-494.
@article{c98875e73e5b4087ab2f81f1d2b0c41a,
title = "Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection",
abstract = "Objective: To test the hypothesis that routine intraperitoneal drainage is not required after pancreatic resection. Summary Background Data: The use of surgically placed intraperitoneal drains has been considered routine after pancreatic resection. Recent studies have suggested that for other major upper abdominal resections, routine postoperative drainage is not required and may be associated with an increased complication rate. Methods: After informed consent, eligible patients with peripancreatic tumors were randomized during surgery either to have no drains placed or to have closed suction drainage placed in a standardized fashion after pancreatic resection. Clinical, pathologic, and surgical details were recorded. Results: One hundred seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the study, 90 women and 89 men. Mean age was 65.4 years (range 23-87). The pancreas was the tumor site in 142 (79{\%}) patients, with the ampulla (n=24), duodenum (n=10), and distal common bile duct (n=3) accounting for the remainder. A pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 139 patients and a distal pancreatectomy in 40 cases. Eighty-eight patients were randomized to have drains placed. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic details were similar between both groups. The overall 30-day death rate was 2{\%} (n=4). A postoperative complication occurred during the initial admission in 107 patients (59{\%}). There was no significant difference in the number or type of complications between groups. In the drained group, 11 patients (12.5{\%}) developed a pancreatic fistula. Patients with a drain were more likely to develop a significant intraabdominal abscess, collection, or fistula. Conclusion: This randomized prospective clinical trial failed to show a reduction in the number of deaths or complications with the addition of surgical intraperitoneal closed suction drainage after pancreatic resection. The data suggest that the presence of drains failed to reduce either the need for interventional radiologic drainage or surgical exploration for intraabdominal sepsis. Based on these results, closed suction drainage should not be considered mandatory or standard after pancreatic resection.",
author = "Conlon, {Kevin C.} and Daniel Labow and Dennis Leung and Alex Smith and William Jarnagin and Coit, {Daniel G.} and Nipun Merchant and Brennan, {Murray F.}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1097/00000658-200110000-00008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "234",
pages = "487--494",
journal = "Annals of Surgery",
issn = "0003-4932",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection

AU - Conlon, Kevin C.

AU - Labow, Daniel

AU - Leung, Dennis

AU - Smith, Alex

AU - Jarnagin, William

AU - Coit, Daniel G.

AU - Merchant, Nipun

AU - Brennan, Murray F.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Objective: To test the hypothesis that routine intraperitoneal drainage is not required after pancreatic resection. Summary Background Data: The use of surgically placed intraperitoneal drains has been considered routine after pancreatic resection. Recent studies have suggested that for other major upper abdominal resections, routine postoperative drainage is not required and may be associated with an increased complication rate. Methods: After informed consent, eligible patients with peripancreatic tumors were randomized during surgery either to have no drains placed or to have closed suction drainage placed in a standardized fashion after pancreatic resection. Clinical, pathologic, and surgical details were recorded. Results: One hundred seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the study, 90 women and 89 men. Mean age was 65.4 years (range 23-87). The pancreas was the tumor site in 142 (79%) patients, with the ampulla (n=24), duodenum (n=10), and distal common bile duct (n=3) accounting for the remainder. A pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 139 patients and a distal pancreatectomy in 40 cases. Eighty-eight patients were randomized to have drains placed. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic details were similar between both groups. The overall 30-day death rate was 2% (n=4). A postoperative complication occurred during the initial admission in 107 patients (59%). There was no significant difference in the number or type of complications between groups. In the drained group, 11 patients (12.5%) developed a pancreatic fistula. Patients with a drain were more likely to develop a significant intraabdominal abscess, collection, or fistula. Conclusion: This randomized prospective clinical trial failed to show a reduction in the number of deaths or complications with the addition of surgical intraperitoneal closed suction drainage after pancreatic resection. The data suggest that the presence of drains failed to reduce either the need for interventional radiologic drainage or surgical exploration for intraabdominal sepsis. Based on these results, closed suction drainage should not be considered mandatory or standard after pancreatic resection.

AB - Objective: To test the hypothesis that routine intraperitoneal drainage is not required after pancreatic resection. Summary Background Data: The use of surgically placed intraperitoneal drains has been considered routine after pancreatic resection. Recent studies have suggested that for other major upper abdominal resections, routine postoperative drainage is not required and may be associated with an increased complication rate. Methods: After informed consent, eligible patients with peripancreatic tumors were randomized during surgery either to have no drains placed or to have closed suction drainage placed in a standardized fashion after pancreatic resection. Clinical, pathologic, and surgical details were recorded. Results: One hundred seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the study, 90 women and 89 men. Mean age was 65.4 years (range 23-87). The pancreas was the tumor site in 142 (79%) patients, with the ampulla (n=24), duodenum (n=10), and distal common bile duct (n=3) accounting for the remainder. A pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 139 patients and a distal pancreatectomy in 40 cases. Eighty-eight patients were randomized to have drains placed. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic details were similar between both groups. The overall 30-day death rate was 2% (n=4). A postoperative complication occurred during the initial admission in 107 patients (59%). There was no significant difference in the number or type of complications between groups. In the drained group, 11 patients (12.5%) developed a pancreatic fistula. Patients with a drain were more likely to develop a significant intraabdominal abscess, collection, or fistula. Conclusion: This randomized prospective clinical trial failed to show a reduction in the number of deaths or complications with the addition of surgical intraperitoneal closed suction drainage after pancreatic resection. The data suggest that the presence of drains failed to reduce either the need for interventional radiologic drainage or surgical exploration for intraabdominal sepsis. Based on these results, closed suction drainage should not be considered mandatory or standard after pancreatic resection.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034796314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034796314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00000658-200110000-00008

DO - 10.1097/00000658-200110000-00008

M3 - Article

C2 - 11573042

AN - SCOPUS:0034796314

VL - 234

SP - 487

EP - 494

JO - Annals of Surgery

JF - Annals of Surgery

SN - 0003-4932

IS - 4

ER -