Does Routine Post-Operative Use of Drainage in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery Offer Better Results?-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Does Routine Post-Operative Use of Drainage in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery Offer Better Results?

Published:2024-07-22 Issue: Volume: Page:
ISSN:2789-9462
Container-title:Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)
language:
Short-container-title:jsp

Author:

Moniakis MD, MSc Alexandros^ORCID,Pacheco-Barrios MSc Niels^ORCID,Quiceno MD Esteban^ORCID,Hussein MD Amna^ORCID,Pico MS Annie^ORCID,Abdulla MD Ebtesam^ORCID,Bauer MS Isabel L.^ORCID,Nosova MD Kristin,Khan MD Monis Ahmed^ORCID,Farhadi MD Dara S.^ORCID,Prim MD Michael^ORCID,Baaj MD Ali^ORCID

Abstract

Objective: The advantages of minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) in lumbar degenerative diseases have been well described (less tissue damage, shorter hospital stay, better results in pain assessment). One aspect that has not yet been studied enough is the usage of a post-operative drain in MISS. The aim of this study was to determine whether drainage in MISS is necessary or not and what advantages or disadvantages its use offers. Materials - Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the published literature, searching articles published on Pubmed and Embasse until December 1st 2022, regarding MISS in the lumbar region and post-operative drain usage. Our inclusion criteria were original articles written in English and articles using minimally invasive techniques (usage of tubular retractors along with an endoscope or microscope, paramedian incision, percutaneous screw placement). 42 articles were assessed, and after careful examination and duplication exclusion, 26 research papers were included. Usage, type and duration of postoperative drainage, length of hospital stay, ambulation time and complications were extracted, and relevant results were pooled. Results: The majority of the included articles (80.7 %) reported using a negative-pressure post-operative drain tube. Drains were removed either 48 hours after surgery or when the drainage volume was less than 50ml/24h. Hospital stays and time to ambulation were shorter in cases where drainage was not used. There was no difference in complications between cases where drainage was used and those that it was not. Conclusion: The rationale behind post-operative drainage in MISS is to protect from surgical site infections and hematoma creation. Based on our study there is no evidence to support this hypothesis. On the contrary, our results suggest that the drawbacks of using a drain (pain, discomfort, anxiety, inconvenience of mobilisation, prolongation of hospitalisation) outweigh the advantages, thus making the routine use of postoperative drainage in MISS unnecessary.

Publisher

Knowledge E DMCC

Reference37 articles.

1. Ravindra VM, Senglaub SS, Rattani A, Dewan MC, Härtl R, Bisson E, et al. Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease: Estimating Global Incidence and Worldwide Volume. Global Spine J. 2018 Dec;8(8):784–94.

2. Starkweather AR, Witek-Janusek L, Nockels RP, Peterson J, Mathews HL. The multiple benefits of minimally invasive spinal surgery: results comparing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar fusion. J Neurosci Nurs. 2008 Feb;40(1):32–9.

3. Phillips FM, Cheng I, Rampersaud YR, Akbarnia BA, Pimenta L, Rodgers WB, et al. Breaking Through the “Glass Ceiling” of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery. Spine. 2016 Apr;41 Suppl 8:S39–43.

4. Lener S, Wipplinger C, Hernandez RN, Hussain I, Kirnaz S, Navarro-Ramirez R, et al. Defining the MIS-TLIF: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Technologies Used by Surgeons Worldwide. Global Spine J. 2020 Apr;10(2 Suppl):151S–67S.

5. Adogwa O, Elsamadicy AA, Sergesketter AR, Shammas RL, Vatsia S, Vuong VD, et al. Post-operative drain use in patients undergoing decompression and fusion: incidence of complications and symptomatic hematoma. J Spine Surg. 2018 Jun;4(2):220–6.