Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in women with gynaecological malignancies

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2017, Issue 6, 2017, Pages

  Charoenkwan, Kittipat ^a   Kietpeerakool, Chumnan ^b  

^a Faculty of Medicine Chiang Mai University   (Thailand)

^b KHON KAEN UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL DRAINAGE; ASCITES; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CYSTIC LYMPHANGIOMA; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT CANCER; FEVER; FISTULA; HUMAN; INTERVENTION STUDY; INTESTINE OBSTRUCTION; INTESTINE SOUND; LEG EDEMA; LENGTH OF STAY; MORBIDITY; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PELVIS LYMPHADENECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RETROPERITONEAL DRAINAGE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT PLANNING; WOMEN'S HEALTH; WOUND DEHISCENCE; WOUND INFECTION; FEMALE; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT TUMOR; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPHOCELE; META ANALYSIS; PELVIS; PROCEDURES; RETROPERITONEUM; SUCTION;

DRAINAGE; FEMALE; GENITAL NEOPLASMS, FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHOCELE; PELVIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RETROPERITONEAL SPACE; SUCTION;

EID: 85021350600     PISSN: 14651858     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007387.pub4     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Benedetti-Panici P, Maneschi F, Butillo G, D'Andrea G, di Palumbo VS, Conte M, et al. A randomized study comparing retroperitoneal drainage with no drainage after lymphadenectomy in gynecologic malignancies. Gynecologic Oncology 1997;65:478-82. 2693225
2. Franchi M, Trimbos J, Zanaboni F, van der Velden J, Reed N, Coens C, et al. Randomised trial of drains versus no drains following radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group (EORTC-GCG) study in 234 patients. European Journal of Cancer 2007;43:1265-8. 2693227
3. Lopes AB, Hall JR, Monaghan JM. Drainage following radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: dogma or need?. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995;86:960-3. 2693229
4. Srisomboon J, Phongnarisorn C, Suprasert P, Cheewakriangkrai C, Siriaree S, Charoenkwan K. A prospective randomized study comparing retroperitoneal drainage with no drainage and no peritonization following radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for invasive cervical cancer. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 2002;28(3):149-53. 2693231
5. Bafna UD, Umadevi K, Savitha M. Closed suction drainage versus no drainage following pelvic lymphadenectomy for gynecological malignancies. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2001;11:143-6. 2693233
6. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Zanaboni F, Scarabelli C, Beretta P, Donadello N. Nonclosure of peritoneum at radical abdominal hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection: a randomized study. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1997;90(4):622-7. 2693235
7. Jensen JK, Lucci JA 3rd, DiSaia PJ, Manetta A, Berman ML. To drain or not to drain: a retrospective study of closed-suction drainage following radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy. Gynecologic Oncology 1993;51(1):46-9. 2693237
8. Morice P, Lassau N, Pautier P, Haie-Meder C, Lhomme C, Castaigne D. Retroperitoneal drainage after complete paraaortic lymphadenectomy for gynecologic cancer: a randomized trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001;97(2):243-7. 2693239
9. Orr JW Jr, Barter JF, Kilgore LC, Soong SJ, Shingleton HM, Hatch KD. Closed suction pelvic drainage after radical pelvic surgical procedures. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1986;155(4):867-71. 2693241
10. Patsner B. Closed-suction drainage versus no drainage following radical abdominal hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for stage IB cervical cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 1995;57:232-4. 2693243
11. Patsner B. Routine retroperitoneal drainage is not required for uncomplicated pelvic lymphadenectomy for uterine cancer. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology 1999;20(2):87-9. 2693245
12. Yamamoto R, Saitoh T, Kusaka T, Todo Y, Takeda M, Okamoto K, et al. Prevention of lymphocyst formation following systematic lymphadenectomy. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 2000;30(9):397-400. 2693247
13. Conte M, Benedetti-Panici P, Guariglia L, Scambia G, Greggi S, Mancuso S. Pelvic lymphocele following radical para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: incidence rate and percutaneous management. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1990;76:268-71.
14. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
15. Schünemann H, Brozek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A, editor(s), GRADE Working Group. GRADE Handbook. gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/central_prod/_design/client/handbook/handbook.html (accessed 31 May 2017).
16. GRADE Working Group, McMaster University. GRADEpro. Hamilton (ON): GRADE Working Group, McMaster University, 2014.
17. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
18. Ilancheran A, Monaghan J. Pelvic lymphocyst - a 10-year experience. Gynecologic Oncology 1988;29:333-6.
19. Livingston W, Confer D, Smith R. Large lymphoceles resulting from retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Journal of Urology 1980;124:543-6.
20. Maitland A, Mathieson A. Suction drainage. A study in wound healing. British Journal of Surgery 1970;57:193-7.
21. Meader N, King K, Llewellyn A, Norman G, Brown J, Rodgers M, et al. A checklist designed to aid consistency and reproducibility of GRADE assessments: development and pilot validation. Systematic Reviews 2014;3:82.
22. Petru E, Tamussino K, Lahousen M, Winter R, Pickel H, Haas J. Pelvic and para-aortic lymphocysts after radical surgery because of cervical and ovarian cancer. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1989;161:937-41.
23. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.2. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2012.
24. Symmond R, Pratt J. Prevention of fistulas and lymphocysts in radical hysterectomy. Preliminary report of a new technique. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1961;17:57-64.
25. Symmond R. Morbidity and complications of radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1966;94:663-78.
26. Van Nagell J, Schweitz D. Surgical adjuncts in radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics 1976;143:735-7.
27. Charoenkwan K, Kietpeerakool C. Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in patients with gynaecological malignancies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007387.pub2]
28. Charoenkwan K, Kietpeerakool C. Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in patients with gynaecological malignancies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007387]