
The principle factor governing the efficacy of a drain is the tissue reaction to the constituent material. This was appreciated during the early development of drainage. Modern materials have been available for more than 20 years but have escaped sound clinical evaluation. In abdominal surgery there is virtually no evidence to support routine intraperitoneal drainage especially with latex rubber unless it is intended to create a fibrous tract as with T-tube drainage of the biliary tree. When drainage is used either static symphonage (Fig. 7), low pressure suction or sump suction with a bacterial air inlet filter should be employed. Silicone rubber (Silastic) tubes are the preferred material. In the parietes closed suction drainage is safe and has achieved a sound reputation for improving healing where serosanguinous oozing is expected. High pressure suction is probably the most effective system. Because of the risk of infection, open drainage systems should, in general, be avoided, especially where a prosthesis is present. Finally, if in doubt, all surgeons should recall the words of Halsteads in 1898 "No drainage at all is better than the ignorant employment of it" rather than the advice of Lawson Tait.
Wound Healing, Suction, Surgical Flaps, Colonic Diseases, Gastrectomy, Abdomen, Splenectomy, Animals, Appendectomy, Drainage, Humans, Surgical Wound Infection, Cholecystectomy, Colectomy
Wound Healing, Suction, Surgical Flaps, Colonic Diseases, Gastrectomy, Abdomen, Splenectomy, Animals, Appendectomy, Drainage, Humans, Surgical Wound Infection, Cholecystectomy, Colectomy
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 23 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
