Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 10/2010

01-10-2010 | Clinical Research

Is Closed-suction Drainage Necessary for Single-level Lumbar Decompression?: Review of 560 Cases

Authors: Masahiro Kanayama, MD, Fumihiro Oha, MD, Daisuke Togawa, MD, Keiichi Shigenobu, MD, Tomoyuki Hashimoto, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 10/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Closed-suction drainage is commonly used for prevention of postoperative hematoma and associated neurologic compromise after lumbar decompression, but it remains unclear whether suction drainage reduces postoperative complications.

Questions/purposes

We evaluated the efficacy of closed-suction drainage in single-level lumbar decompression surgery.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 560 patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression or discectomy. We routinely used closed-suction drainage in all spinal surgeries until July 2003, and thereafter, we did not use drains in single-level lumbar decompression surgery. These two groups (298 patients in the group that received drains, 262 in the group that did not receive drains) were compared for rates of wound infection and epidural hematoma.

Results

Mean operating time (55 versus 56 minutes) and intraoperative blood loss (64 versus 57 mL) were not different between the two groups. None of 560 patients had a wound infection requiring surgical intervention. The rate of postoperative hematoma was 0.7% in the group that received drains (two of 298 patients) and 0% in the group that did not receive drains (zero of 262 patients).

Conclusions

In this study, the risk of wound infection and hematomas in single-level lumbar decompression surgery was not influenced by use of a drain. The use of postoperative wound drainage in patients with potential risk for epidural bleeding in situations such as multiple-level decompression, instrumentation surgery, anticoagulant therapy, trauma, and tumors or metastases needs additional study.

Level of Evidence

Level III, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Literature
1.
Awad JN, Kebaish KM, Donigan J, Cohen DB, Kostuik JP. Analysis of the risk factors for the development of post-operative spinal epidural haematoma. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:1248–1252.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Brown MD, Brookfield KF. A randomized study of closed wound suction drainage for extensive lumbar spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004;29:1066–1068.
3.
Di Lauro L, Poli R, Bortoluzzi M, Marini G. Paresthesias after lumbar disc removal and their relationship to epidural hematoma: report of two cases. J Neurosurg. 1982;57:135–136.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Dimick JB, Lipsett PA, Kostuik JP. Spine update: antimicrobial prophylaxis in spine surgery: basic principles and recent advances. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:2544–2548.
5.
Kanayama M, Hashimoto T, Shigenobu K, Oha F, Togawa D. Effective prevention of surgical site infection using a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline-based antimicrobial prophylaxis in lumbar spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6:327–329.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Kou J, Fischgrund J, Biddinger A, Herkowitz H. Risk factors for spinal epidural hematoma after spinal surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27:1670–1673.
7.
Lang GJ, Richardson M, Bosse MJ, Greene K, Meyer RA Jr, Sims SH, Kellam JF. Efficacy of surgical wound drainage in orthopaedic trauma patients: a randomized prospective trial. J Orthop Trauma. 1998;12:348–350.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Lawton MT, Porter RW, Heiserman JE, Jacobowitz R, Sonntag VK, Dickman CA. Surgical management of spinal epidural hematoma: relationship between surgical timing and neurological outcome. J Neurosurg. 1995;83:1–7.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Morse K, Weight M, Molinari R. Extensive postoperative epidural hematoma after full anticoagulation: case report and review of the literature. J Spinal Cord Med. 2007;30:282–287.PubMed
10.
Parker MJ, Roberts CP, Hay D. Closed suction drainage for hip and knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1146–1152.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Payne DH, Fischgrund JS, Herkowitz HN, Barry RL, Kurz LT, Montgomery DM. Efficacy of closed wound suction drainage after single-level lumbar laminectomy. J Spinal Disord. 1996;9:401–403.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Ritter MA, Keating EM, Faris PM. Closed wound drainage in total hip or total knee replacement: a prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994;76:35–38.PubMed
13.
Scuderi GJ, Brusovanik GV, Fitzhenry LN, Vaccaro AR. Is wound drainage necessary after lumbar spinal fusion surgery? Med Sci Monit 2005;11:64–66.PubMed
14.
Tenney JH, Vlahov D, Salcman M, Ducker TB. Wide variation in risk of wound infection following clean neurosurgery: implications for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. J Neurosurg. 1985;62:243–247.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Tjeenk RM, Peeters MP, van den Ende E, Kastelein GW, Breslau PJ. Wound drainage versus non-drainage for proximal femoral fractures: a prospective randomised study. Injury. 2005;36:100–104.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Is Closed-suction Drainage Necessary for Single-level Lumbar Decompression?: Review of 560 Cases
Authors
Masahiro Kanayama, MD
Fumihiro Oha, MD
Daisuke Togawa, MD
Keiichi Shigenobu, MD
Tomoyuki Hashimoto, MD
Publication date
01-10-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 10/2010
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1235-6

Other articles of this Issue 10/2010

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 10/2010 Go to the issue

Symposium: ABJS Carl T. Brighton Workshop on Health Informatics

Assessing Readability of Patient Education Materials: Current Role in Orthopaedics

Clinical Research

Radiographic Prevalence of Femoroacetabular Impingement in a Young Population with Hip Complaints Is High

Clinical Research

Pain Relief, Motion, and Function after Rotator Cuff Repair or Reconstruction May Not Persist after 16 Years

Symposium: ABJS Carl T. Brighton Workshop on Health Informatics

Ethical Choice in the Medical Applications of Information Theory

Erratum

Erratum to: ABJS Carl T. Brighton Workshop on Health Informatics in Orthopaedic Surgery: Editorial Comment

In Brief

In Brief: Classifications in Brief: Mirels’ Classification: Metastatic Disease in Long Bones and Impending Pathologic Fracture