Closed suction drainage systems are commonly used in orthopaedic surgery, particularly in joint arthroplasty. The rationale for the use of drains is a theoretical reduction of wound haematomas and infection. However the benefit of using drains after total hip or knee arthroplasty is controversial. Several reports have shown that the use of drains does not reduce infection and morbidity and is an unnecessary and potentially dangerous practice. In fact most studies highlighted that at best their use appears to make no difference to important clinical outcomes. Recently a metaanalysis raised the question about the usefulness of closed suction drainage again, concluding that it has no major benefits. The purpose of this study was to review the evidences available concerning the utility of closed suction drainage outlining that this practice is not supported by clinical evidence.
Coronary stenting (stent implantation) has evolved over the last 5 years with changes in stent design, stent material and the implantation technique. The use of high-pressure balloon inflation (HP), intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and appropriate antiplatelet therapy have contributed to the abolishment of the need for subsequent anticoagulation, allowing extended stent applications. We compared results in three groups of patients having stent implantation throughout the period of evolution: group A: no IVUS, no HP, with subsequent anticoagulation treatment (n 3 434); group B: no IVUS, yes HP, without subsequent anticoagulation treatment (n 3 192); and group C: yes IVUS, yes HP, without subsequent anticoagulation treatment (n 3 588). The primary success rates were comparable in all groups. There was a clear change in indications for stenting in groups B and C compared with group A (elective stenting: group A 3 32%; group B 3 66%; group C 3 69%; P < 0.0001), in reference vessel size (group A 3 3.22 3 0.37 mm; group B 3 2.92 3 0.56 mm; group C 3 2.98 3 0.57 mm; P < 0.0001), and for presence of type B2 and C lesions (group A 3 57%; group B 3 72%; group C 3 74%; P < 0.001). The complication rate significantly decreased in group C (group A 3 3.6%; group B 3 4.1%; group C 3 1.2%; P < 0.001) and the mean patient hospital stay decreased to 2 days in groups B and C due to the abolition of the need for anticoagulant treatment. The angiographic restenosis rate increased in groups B and C (group A 3 20%; group B 3 34%; group C 3 32%; P < 0.001). The need for a repeat procedure increased as stenting of more complex lesions and smaller vessels was attempted: target lesion revascularization (TLR) was performed in 16% of patients in group A (73/434), in 18% of group B (35/192) and in 22% of group C (129/588) (P 3 0.04 for A versus C). Major cardiac events (MACE) occurred in 142 patients in group A (33%), 60 patients in group B (31%) and in 181 patients in group C (30%). The evolving technique of coronary stenting has expanded the spectrum of indications and range of coronary vessels attempted, and decreased the complication rates and hospital stay. However, in less-favorable subsets, additional improvements are needed to affect the long-term outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.