Comparative Assessment of Outcomes

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes between abdominal drain placement and no drain placement postpancreatectomy. BACKGROUND: Left pancreatectomy (LP) is a surgical procedure commonly employed for various pancreatic conditions, often associated with postoperative complications like postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). While routine abdominal drainage following LP has been standard practice, recent evidence suggests potential benefits of omitting this approach. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase from inception up to 15 March 2024, yielding nine studies comprising 15,817 patients. Data were extracted from randomized and nonrandomized studies reporting primary and secondary outcomes. The analysis was performed in Revman. Risk ratios were calculated with 95% CIs, and a P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 13,081 patients underwent drain placement after left pancreatectomy, and 2736 patients were included in the no-drain group. Out of the total, 45.1% (n=7140) patients were male, with 45.9% (n=6012) males in the drain group and 41.2% (n=1128) males in the no-drain group. Major morbidity, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications, was significantly lower in the no-drain group [relative risk (RR): 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93, P =0.006]. Similarly, lower rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.38-0.67, P <0.00001), readmission (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.59-0.96, P =0.02), and surgical site infections (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70-0.95, P =0.009) were observed in the no-drain group. In addition, a shorter length of hospital stay was noted in this group [mean difference (MD): -1.65, 95% CI: -2.50 to -0.81, P =0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Omitting routine drainage after a left pancreatectomy is associated with reduced complications and shorter hospital stays, supporting its potential benefits in improving postoperative outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.