No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail
Purpose The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs. Materials and methods We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated pepti...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007) 2024-10, Vol.50 (5), p.2137-2145 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2145 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 2137 |
| container_title | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007) |
| container_volume | 50 |
| creator | Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy Tobar, Wael Saqr, Ahmed Ragab, Amr Aly Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman |
| description | Purpose
The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs.
Materials and methods
We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated peptic ulcers were evaluated for eligibility. They were randomly assigned into two groups. In group A: two intraabdominal drains (pelvic and hepatorenal). in group B: no intraabdominal drains. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes included parameters of recovery and 30-day morbidities. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 ®.
Results
Thirty five patients were in the no drain group, while 36 patients were in the drain group. Patients in the no drains group had significantly earlier bowel motion (21.6 vs 28.69 hours;
p
= 0.004), fluid diet (73.54 vs 86.78 hours;
p
0.001), and solid intake (84.4 vs. 98 hours;
p
0.001), less pain severity (
p
= 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (4.74 vs 5.75 days;
p
0.001). A significant less morbidity, including surgical site infection (
p
= 0.01), and respiratory complications (
p
0.0001), were in the no drain group. There was no difference of fever duration nor wound dehiscence.
Conclusions
Omitting the intraabdominal drains is safe after peptic ulcer perforation repair. It can improve outcomes.
The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084741. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3068751733</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3133048118</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-15b2e6ef8e914efd2b529012abb8a569240a28ecc22bf201fbcbea005eab6f913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOxCAUhonROOPoC7gwTdy4qXIpDHVnJt6SiW505YIAPZhOOqVCa6JPLzoXExcuCOfAd37Ih9AxwecE4-lFxBgLmWNapMU5ycUOGhMpWF6WBdnd1oyN0EGMi0Rjwek-GjEppxILNkYvDz6rgq7bmL1DiEPcdNr1ELIOgvNB91Clsutrmw2NTecBOl2Hy-wqC7qt_LL-TIT1bR9806SyTyHNIdpzuolwtN4n6Pnm-ml2l88fb-9nV_PcUi76nHBDQYCTUJICXEUNpyUmVBsjNRclLbCmEqyl1DiKiTPWgMaYgzbClYRN0Nkqtwv-bYDYq2UdLTSNbsEPUbFkacrJlLGEnv5BF34IbfqdYoQxXEhCZKLoirLBxxjAqS7USx0-FMHqW71aqVdJvfpRr0QaOllHD2YJ1XZk4zoBbAXEdNW-Qvh9-5_YL2aKj1c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3133048118</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy ; Tobar, Wael ; Saqr, Ahmed ; Ragab, Amr Aly ; Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</creator><creatorcontrib>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy ; Tobar, Wael ; Saqr, Ahmed ; Ragab, Amr Aly ; Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs.
Materials and methods
We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated peptic ulcers were evaluated for eligibility. They were randomly assigned into two groups. In group A: two intraabdominal drains (pelvic and hepatorenal). in group B: no intraabdominal drains. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes included parameters of recovery and 30-day morbidities. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 ®.
Results
Thirty five patients were in the no drain group, while 36 patients were in the drain group. Patients in the no drains group had significantly earlier bowel motion (21.6 vs 28.69 hours;
p
= 0.004), fluid diet (73.54 vs 86.78 hours;
p
0.001), and solid intake (84.4 vs. 98 hours;
p
0.001), less pain severity (
p
= 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (4.74 vs 5.75 days;
p
0.001). A significant less morbidity, including surgical site infection (
p
= 0.01), and respiratory complications (
p
0.0001), were in the no drain group. There was no difference of fever duration nor wound dehiscence.
Conclusions
Omitting the intraabdominal drains is safe after peptic ulcer perforation repair. It can improve outcomes.
The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084741.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1863-9933</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1863-9941</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1863-9941</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38878063</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Critical Care Medicine ; Drainage - methods ; Emergency Medicine ; Female ; Humans ; Intensive ; Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Original Article ; Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery ; Postoperative Complications ; Prospective Studies ; Sports Medicine ; Surgery ; Surgical Orthopedics ; Traumatic Surgery ; Ulcers</subject><ispartof>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007), 2024-10, Vol.50 (5), p.2137-2145</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-15b2e6ef8e914efd2b529012abb8a569240a28ecc22bf201fbcbea005eab6f913</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38878063$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tobar, Wael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saqr, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ragab, Amr Aly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</creatorcontrib><title>No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail</title><title>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</title><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><description>Purpose
The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs.
Materials and methods
We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated peptic ulcers were evaluated for eligibility. They were randomly assigned into two groups. In group A: two intraabdominal drains (pelvic and hepatorenal). in group B: no intraabdominal drains. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes included parameters of recovery and 30-day morbidities. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 ®.
Results
Thirty five patients were in the no drain group, while 36 patients were in the drain group. Patients in the no drains group had significantly earlier bowel motion (21.6 vs 28.69 hours;
p
= 0.004), fluid diet (73.54 vs 86.78 hours;
p
0.001), and solid intake (84.4 vs. 98 hours;
p
0.001), less pain severity (
p
= 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (4.74 vs 5.75 days;
p
0.001). A significant less morbidity, including surgical site infection (
p
= 0.01), and respiratory complications (
p
0.0001), were in the no drain group. There was no difference of fever duration nor wound dehiscence.
Conclusions
Omitting the intraabdominal drains is safe after peptic ulcer perforation repair. It can improve outcomes.
The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084741.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Critical Care Medicine</subject><subject>Drainage - methods</subject><subject>Emergency Medicine</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intensive</subject><subject>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Sports Medicine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><subject>Traumatic Surgery</subject><subject>Ulcers</subject><issn>1863-9933</issn><issn>1863-9941</issn><issn>1863-9941</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtOxCAUhonROOPoC7gwTdy4qXIpDHVnJt6SiW505YIAPZhOOqVCa6JPLzoXExcuCOfAd37Ih9AxwecE4-lFxBgLmWNapMU5ycUOGhMpWF6WBdnd1oyN0EGMi0Rjwek-GjEppxILNkYvDz6rgq7bmL1DiEPcdNr1ELIOgvNB91Clsutrmw2NTecBOl2Hy-wqC7qt_LL-TIT1bR9806SyTyHNIdpzuolwtN4n6Pnm-ml2l88fb-9nV_PcUi76nHBDQYCTUJICXEUNpyUmVBsjNRclLbCmEqyl1DiKiTPWgMaYgzbClYRN0Nkqtwv-bYDYq2UdLTSNbsEPUbFkacrJlLGEnv5BF34IbfqdYoQxXEhCZKLoirLBxxjAqS7USx0-FMHqW71aqVdJvfpRr0QaOllHD2YJ1XZk4zoBbAXEdNW-Qvh9-5_YL2aKj1c</recordid><startdate>20241001</startdate><enddate>20241001</enddate><creator>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy</creator><creator>Tobar, Wael</creator><creator>Saqr, Ahmed</creator><creator>Ragab, Amr Aly</creator><creator>Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241001</creationdate><title>No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail</title><author>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy ; Tobar, Wael ; Saqr, Ahmed ; Ragab, Amr Aly ; Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c256t-15b2e6ef8e914efd2b529012abb8a569240a28ecc22bf201fbcbea005eab6f913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Critical Care Medicine</topic><topic>Drainage - methods</topic><topic>Emergency Medicine</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intensive</topic><topic>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Sports Medicine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><topic>Traumatic Surgery</topic><topic>Ulcers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tobar, Wael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saqr, Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ragab, Amr Aly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nageeb, Mohammed Elshwadfy</au><au>Tobar, Wael</au><au>Saqr, Ahmed</au><au>Ragab, Amr Aly</au><au>Elansary, Ahmed Mohammed Salah eldeen Othman</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail</atitle><jtitle>European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007)</jtitle><stitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</stitle><addtitle>Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg</addtitle><date>2024-10-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2137</spage><epage>2145</epage><pages>2137-2145</pages><issn>1863-9933</issn><issn>1863-9941</issn><eissn>1863-9941</eissn><abstract>Purpose
The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs.
Materials and methods
We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated peptic ulcers were evaluated for eligibility. They were randomly assigned into two groups. In group A: two intraabdominal drains (pelvic and hepatorenal). in group B: no intraabdominal drains. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes included parameters of recovery and 30-day morbidities. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 ®.
Results
Thirty five patients were in the no drain group, while 36 patients were in the drain group. Patients in the no drains group had significantly earlier bowel motion (21.6 vs 28.69 hours;
p
= 0.004), fluid diet (73.54 vs 86.78 hours;
p
0.001), and solid intake (84.4 vs. 98 hours;
p
0.001), less pain severity (
p
= 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (4.74 vs 5.75 days;
p
0.001). A significant less morbidity, including surgical site infection (
p
= 0.01), and respiratory complications (
p
0.0001), were in the no drain group. There was no difference of fever duration nor wound dehiscence.
Conclusions
Omitting the intraabdominal drains is safe after peptic ulcer perforation repair. It can improve outcomes.
The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084741.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>38878063</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1863-9933 |
| ispartof | European journal of trauma and emergency surgery (Munich : 2007), 2024-10, Vol.50 (5), p.2137-2145 |
| issn | 1863-9933 1863-9941 1863-9941 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3068751733 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Adult Aged Critical Care Medicine Drainage - methods Emergency Medicine Female Humans Intensive Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Original Article Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery Postoperative Complications Prospective Studies Sports Medicine Surgery Surgical Orthopedics Traumatic Surgery Ulcers |
| title | No drains versus drains after perforated peptic ulcer repair: A randomized controlled trail |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T18%3A19%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=No%20drains%20versus%20drains%20after%20perforated%20peptic%20ulcer%20repair:%20A%20randomized%20controlled%20trail&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20trauma%20and%20emergency%20surgery%20(Munich%20:%202007)&rft.au=Nageeb,%20Mohammed%20Elshwadfy&rft.date=2024-10-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2137&rft.epage=2145&rft.pages=2137-2145&rft.issn=1863-9933&rft.eissn=1863-9941&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00068-024-02551-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3133048118%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3133048118&rft_id=info:pmid/38878063&rfr_iscdi=true |