Percutaneous retrieval of a retained Jackson-Pratt drain fragment

Namyslowski, Jan; Halin, Neil J.; Greenfield, Alan J.

doi:10.1007/bf02577637

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, when it does occur, it can cause embarrassment to the surgical team and increase the risk to the patient as well as increase cost if a return trip to the operating room for formal wound exploration is needed. Several articles have previously discussed the preventive and removal techniques of tethered drains 578910. Lazarides et al 7.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…described the use of a Steinmann pin to extract a drain by inserting the sharp end of the pin into the lumen of the surgical drain to cut the suture. Namyslowski et al 8. described the use of an angioplasty balloon to retrieve drain fragments, whereas Rue and Johnson10 described a technique to remove a snared silicone drain by twisting the drains five to seven turns while gentle in-line traction was applied.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Retention of such drain fragments may not cause direct harm but often causes distress, embarrassment, and may result in litigation 56. There have been several articles describing the preventive and removal techniques of such tethered drains 578910. This article describes a minimally-invasive surgical technique for tethered drain removal when nonsurgical measures fail.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Minimally invasive surgical technique for tethered surgical drains

Hess

Satpathy

Waligora

et al. 2017

IJOO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A feared complication of temporary surgical drain placement is from the technical error of accidentally suturing the surgical drain into the wound. Postoperative discovery of a tethered drain can frequently necessitate return to the operating room if it cannot be successfully removed with nonoperative techniques. Formal wound exploration increases anesthesia and infection risk as well as cost and is best avoided if possible. We present a minimally invasive surgical technique that can avoid the morbidity associated with a full surgical wound exploration to remove a tethered drain when other nonoperative techniques fail.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Minimally invasive surgical technique for tethered surgical drains

Hess

Satpathy

Waligora

et al. 2017

IJOO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 Namyslowski et al discussed utilizing balloon angioplasty through the drain site. 7 Almost always, the patients ended up undergoing re-exploration using formal laparotomy. With the diversity and new instruments evolving in laparoscopy, laparoscopic removal of retained drains is feasible and has become the treatment of choice.…”

Section: Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

A retained surgical drain in the abdomen for five years

Irpatgire

Chakrod

2016

Int Surg J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retained surgical drain in the peritoneal cavity is very rare but potentially dangerous error. Most cases are unreported because of the fear of medico-legal problems. Management of such iatrogenic complications requires repeated laparotomy or wound exploration. We reported a case of a large corrugated rubber drain migrated and retained accidently in the abdominal cavity in a patient who underwent exploratory laparotomy for peritonitis secondary to perforated appendix about five years ago.

show abstract

“…Although the risk/benefit of infection and hematoma cannot be definitively answered from the literature, there could be some other perils of leaving a drain. For one, anytime a drain is left, there is a risk of drain fracture and retained fragments [19]. If this occurred in an IPP patient, the risk of infection introduced by reexploration of a patient in the early postoperative period would be high.…”

Section: Risks Of Closed‐suction Drainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a Closed-Suction Drain Advantageous for Penile Implant Surgery? The Debate Continues

Kramer¹,

Goldmark²,

Greenfield³

2011

The Journal of Sexual Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The debate about leaving a closed-suction drain during penile implant surgery remains unsolved. What is the current thinking about the pros and cons of leaving a scrotal drain for inflatable penile implant (IPP) surgery? Aims The aim of this study is to explore the fund of existing information, and formulate a point and counterpoint debate analyzing the drain issue for implant surgery. Methods Two differing points of view are given to answer the question of benefit vs. risk drains in implant patients. Main Outcome Measures To facilitate the debate about a longstanding urologic question. Results There are two conflicting points presented in this manuscript, one supporting drain placement, the other opposing it in light of the risks and benefits. Conclusions Without prospective randomized controlled trials specifically looking at drain placement following IPP, it is unclear whether or not this intervention is beneficial. Until a study of this type is performed, leaving a drain will largely remain a surgeon preference.

show abstract

Percutaneous retrieval of a retained Jackson-Pratt drain fragment

Cited by 12 publications

References 5 publications

Minimally invasive surgical technique for tethered surgical drains

Minimally invasive surgical technique for tethered surgical drains

A retained surgical drain in the abdomen for five years

Is a Closed-Suction Drain Advantageous for Penile Implant Surgery? The Debate Continues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About