What do systematic reviews say?

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage leads to higher short‐term lymphocyst formation: symptomatic within 4 weeks after… compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (high certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.25 [1.26, 8.37]
  2 studies · 237 participants
  High

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage showed no clear difference in short‐term lymphocyst formation: both asymptomatic and symptomatic… compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (high certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.72 [0.3, 1.71]
  2 studies · 180 participants
  High

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage showed no clear difference in long‐term lymphocyst formation: both asymptomatic and symptomatic at… compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (high certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.48 [0.89, 2.45]
  1 study · 232 participants
  High

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage showed no clear difference in long‐term lymphocyst formation: symptomatic at 12 months after surgery compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (low certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 7.12 [0.89, 56.97]
  1 study · 232 participants
  Low

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage showed no clear difference in febrile morbidity compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (high certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.76 [0.87, 3.55]
  4 studies · 571 participants
  High

Retroperitoneal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Retroperitoneal drainage showed no clear difference in pelvic infection compared with no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy (moderate certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.42 [0.11, 1.62]
  4 studies · 571 participants
  Moderate

Intra‐abdominal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Intra‐abdominal drainage showed no clear difference in anastomotic dehiscence compared with no drainage (low certainty).

• Intra‐abdominal drains for the prophylaxis of anastomotic leak in elective colorectal surgery 2004 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.4 [0.45, 4.4]
  2 studies · 809 participants
  Low

Intra‐abdominal drainage vs no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy

Intra‐abdominal drainage showed no clear difference in mortality compared with no drainage (low certainty).

• Intra‐abdominal drains for the prophylaxis of anastomotic leak in elective colorectal surgery 2004 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.77 [0.41, 1.45]
  3 studies · 908 participants
  Low

Early vs late drain removal following pancreatic surgery

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Prophylactic abdominal drainage for pancreatic surgery 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Needle aspiration (needle removed immediately after aspiration) vs intercostal tube drainage

It is very uncertain whether needle aspiration (needle removed immediately after aspiration) changes need for intercostal tube drainage compared with intercostal tube drainage (very low certainty).

• Needle aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for pneumothorax in the newborn 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.7 [0.56, 0.88]
  1 study · 70 participants
  Very low

Needle aspiration (needle or angiocatheter left in situ) vs intercostal tube drainage

It is very uncertain whether needle aspiration (needle or angiocatheter left in situ) changes need for intercostal tube drainage compared with intercostal tube drainage (very low certainty).

• Needle aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for pneumothorax in the newborn 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.01 [0, 0.21]
  1 study · 72 participants
  Very low

Intraperitoneal drain vs no intraperitoneal drain

• Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 320 participants
  Very low

Intraperitoneal drain vs no intraperitoneal drain

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intraperitoneal drain vs no intraperitoneal drain

• Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 253 participants
  Low

Intraperitoneal drain vs no intraperitoneal drain

Intraperitoneal drain may leads to lower incidence of STP at 24 hours post‐operatively compared with no intraperitoneal drain (low certainty).

• Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.3 [0.2, 0.46]
  3 studies · 417 participants
  Low

T‐tube drainage vs primary closure

It is very uncertain whether T‐tube drainage changes peri‐operative mortality compared with primary closure (very low certainty).

• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.25 [0.55, 9.25]
  6 studies · 359 participants
  Very low

T‐tube drainage vs primary closure

It is very uncertain whether T‐tube drainage changes serious morbidity (rate) compared with primary closure (very low certainty).

• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Rate ratio 2.19 [0.98, 4.91]
  4 studies · 272 participants
  Very low
• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.53 [0.29, 21.98]
  1 study · 35 participants
  Very low

T‐tube drainage vs primary closure

• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 40 participants
  Very low

T‐tube drainage vs primary closure

• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after open common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  5 studies · 333 participants
  Very low

T‐tube drainage vs primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

It is very uncertain whether T‐tube drainage changes serious morbidity (rate) compared with primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (very low certainty).

• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Rate ratio 1.59 [0.66, 3.83]
  3 studies · 295 participants
  Very low
• T‐tube drainage versus primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.86 [0.87, 3.96]
  3 studies · 295 participants
  Very low