Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to determine if the routine use of closed suction wound drainage is justified following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of femoral shaft fractures.
Method
This was a prospective comparative study of two study groups: those with post-operative closed suction drainage (WCSD) and those not with closed suction drainage (NWCSD).
Results
Fifty-six patients, twenty-eight each for the two cohorts, were recruited for this study. Five patients (17.9%) in the WCSD group and only one patient (3.6%) in NWCSD group had surgical site infection (p = 0.20). Four patients (14.3%) in the WCSD group and nine (32.1%) in NWCSD group had wound dressing reinforcements (p = 0.21).
Conclusion
There was generally no statistically significant difference in the incidence of wound infections, strike through bloodstain with wound dressing reinforcement and duration of hospital stay in patients with and without closed suction wound drainage after ORIF of femoral shaft fractures. The duration of the injury may however influence the decision to use or not use wound drain after surgery.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Makama JG, Ameh EA (2008) Surgical drain: what a resident needs to know. Niger J Med:244–250
Dougherty SH, Simmons RL (1992) The biology and practice of drains. Curr Probl Surg 29:559–623
Durai R, Mownah A (2009) Use of drains in surgery: a review. J Perioper Pract 19:180–186
Gaines RJ, Dunbar RP (2008) The use of surgical drains in orthopaedics. Orthopaedics 31(7):702–705
Fichman SG, Makinen TJ, Lozano B, Rahman WA, Safir O, Gross AE, Backstein D, Kuzyk PR (2016) Closed suction drainage has no benefits in revision total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Int Orthop 40(3):453–457
Ikpeme AI, Ngim EN, Iniabisi UI, Enembe O, Udosen AM (2013) Prophylactic wound drainage in orthopaedics: a comparative evaluation of closed suction drainage versus no- drainage in a Nigerian teaching hospital. Surg Sci 4:277–282
Lawal YZ, Ogirima MO, Dahiru IL, Abubakar K, Ajibade A (2014) On the use of drains in orthopaedics and trauma. Niger J Clin Pract 17(3):366–369
Waugh TR, Stinchfield FE (1961) Suction drainage of orthopaedic wounds. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1961; 43-A: 939–946
Walmsley PJ, Kelly MB, Hill RM, Brenkel I (2005) A prospective randomized controlled trial of the use of drains in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 87-B:1397–14001
Akinyoola AL, Odunsi A, Yusuf MB (2012) Use of wound drains following open reduction and internal fixations of femoral shaft fractures. J Wound Care 21(6):279–284
Launtenbach EE, Timessen CH, Cunningham S, Farah A (2000) How effective is suction drainage? South African Bone Surg; 10; 14–17
Dingemans SA, Birnie MF, Backes M, de Jong VM, Luitse JS, Goslings JS, Schepers T (2018) Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy after lower extremity fracture surgery: a pilot study. Int Orthop 42(4):747–753
Tjeenk RM, Peeters MP, Van den Ende E, Kastelein GW, Breslau PJ (2005) Wound drainage versus non drainage for proximal femoral fractures. A prospective randomized study. Injury 36(1):100–104
Cobb JP (1990) Why use drains. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 72-B:993–995
Varley GW, Milner SA (1995) Wound drains in proximal femoral fracture surgery. A randomized prospective trial of 177 patients. J R Coll Surg Edinb 40:416–418
Khanal GP, Rijal R, Shrrestha BP, Karn NK (2011) A study to evaluate the role of suction drains in orthopaedic surgery. Health Renaissance 9(2):91–94
Niskanen RO, Korkala OL, Haapala J, Kuokanen HO (2000) Drainage is of no use in primary uncomplicated cemented hip and knee arthroplasties for osteoarthritis: a prospective randomized study. J Arthroplast 15:567–569
Holt BT, Parks NL, Engh GA, Lawrence JM (1997) Comparison of closed suction drainage and no drainage after primary total knee arthroplasty. Orthopaedics. 20(12):1121–1125
Esler CN, Blakeway C, Fiddian NJ (2003) The use of closed suction drain in total knee arthroplasty. A prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 85:215–217
Kim YH, Cho SH, Kim RS (1998) Drainage versus non-drainage in simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasties. J Arthroplast 13:156–161
Leb RB, Parker RD, Cohn BT, Fabian V (1995) The efficacy of closed suction drainage in total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Trans 19:332–333
Iamaguchi RB, Takemura RL, Silva GB, de Oliveira Alves JA, Torres LR, Cho AB, Wei TH, de Rezende MR, Mattar R Jr. (2018) Peri-operative risk factors for complications of free flaps in traumatic wounds - a cross - sectional study. Int Orthop 42(5): 1149–1156
Ovadia D, Luger E, Bickels J, Manachem A, Dekel S (1997) Efficacy of closed suction wound drainage after total joint arthroplasty. A prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 12(3):317–321
Adalberth G, Bystrom S, Kostad K, Mallmin H (1998) Postoperative drainage of knee arthroplasty is not necessary: a randomized study of 90 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 69(5):475–478
Durai R, Philip CH (2010) Surgical vacuum drains, types, uses and complications. AORN J 91:266–271
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The comparative study was approved by the institutional research ethics board. All patients gave their oral and written informed consent for participation in the study before recruitment
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(13 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Muoghalu, O.N., Eyichukwu, G.O., Iyidobi, E. et al. A comparison of the use and non-use of closed suction wound drainage in open reduction and internal fixation of femoral shaft fractures. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 43, 2003–2008 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04364-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04364-4