Comparative Analysis of Percutaneous Drainage versus Operative Drainage of Intra-Abdominal Abscesses in a Resource-Limited Setting: The Tanzanian Experience

Abstract

Background: Intra-abdominal abscesses (IAAs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. While image-guided percutaneous abscess drainage (PAD) has become the standard of care in many countries, over half of the global population does not have access to interventional radiology (IR) and are left with surgery as the only option for source control. Objective:The purpose of this study is to evaluate the development, implementation, and role of a PAD service in a resource-limited setting.Method: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all patients who underwent percutaneous or surgical abscess drainage (SAD) of IAAs at Tanzania's national referral hospital from 10/2018 to 4/2021. Patients were identified through a match case search of institutional records and inclusion was confirmed through manual chart review. Demographics, patient presentation, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were recorded in a password-encrypted database and compared between groups.Findings: Sixty-three patients underwent abscess drainage: 32 percutaneously and 31 surgically. In the PAD group, there was a 100% technical success rate and a 0% complication rate. In the SAD group, there was a 64.5% technical success rate and ten deaths within 30 days (32.3%), and one additional complication requiring major therapy (3.2%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion:Results from this study demonstrate that PAD can be performed with high technical success and without complication by trained IR physicians in Tanzania. The development of a successful PAD program exemplifies the drastic need to support the growth of IR services in this setting.

Prophylactic Intra-abdominal Drains in Major Elective Surgeries: A Comprehensive Review

“…Comparative research: There is a necessity for conducting direct and equitable comparisons of different methods for managing intra-abdominal drainage. This includes evaluating standard drainage protocols (SDP), directed drainage protocols (DDP), and multi-criteria analysis (MCA) in a comprehensive manner [ 47 ]. Comparative research can elucidate the strengths and limitations of each approach, guiding the development of more effective drainage strategies.…”