What do systematic reviews say?

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

It is very uncertain whether drainage changes intraperitoneal abscess compared with no drainage after open appendectomy (very low certainty).

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.23 [0.47, 3.21]
  5 studies · 453 participants
  Very low

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

It is very uncertain whether drainage changes wound infection compared with no drainage after open appendectomy (very low certainty).

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.01 [0.88, 4.56]
  5 studies · 478 participants
  Very low

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

Drainage may leads to higher morbidity compared with no drainage after open appendectomy (low certainty).

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 6.67 [2.13, 20.87]
  1 study · 90 participants
  Low

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

Drainage may leads to higher mortality compared with no drainage after open appendectomy (low certainty).

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 4.88 [1.18, 20.09]
  4 studies · 363 participants
  Low

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

Drainage showed no clear difference in hospital stay (days) compared with no drainage after open appendectomy (low certainty).

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 2.17
  3 studies · 298 participants
  Low

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Drainage vs no drainage after open appendectomy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Abdominal drainage to prevent intra‐peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

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 (moderate certainty).

• Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in… 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.76 [0.04, 13.35]
  2 studies · 204 participants
  Moderate

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

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