This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Further opinion Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Walmsley, P. J. Articles by Brenkel, I. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Walmsley, P. J. Articles by Brenkel, I.

A prospective, randomised, controlled trial of the use of drains in total hip arthroplasty

¹ Department of Orthopaedics, Queen Margaret Hospital, Whitefield Road, Dunfermline, Fife KY12 0SU, UK.
² Royal West Sussex NHS Trust, St Richard’s Hospital, Chichester, West Sussex, UK. Fife Acute Hospitals, Whitefield Road, Dunfermline, Fife, UK.

Correspondence should be sent to Mr P. J. Walmsley at 49 Timber Bush, Leith, Edinburgh EH6 6QH, UK; e-mail: pjwalmsley{at}rcsed.ac.uk

The routine use of surgical drains in total hip arthroplasty remains controversial. They have not been shown to decrease the rate of wound infection significantly and can provide a retrograde route for it. Their use does not reduce the size or incidence of post-operative wound haematomas. This prospective, randomised study was designed to evaluate the role of drains in routine total hip arthroplasty.

We investigated 552 patients (577 hips) undergoing unilateral or bilateral total hip arthroplasty who had been randomised to either having a drain for 24 hours or not having a drain. All patients followed standardised pre-, intra-, and post-operative regimes and were independently assessed using the Harris hip score before operation and at six, 18 and 36 months follow-up.

The rate of superficial and deep infection was 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively, in the drained group and 4.8% and 0.7%, respectively in the undrained group. One patient in the undrained group had a haematoma which did not require drainage or transfusion. The rate of transfusion after operation in the drained group was significantly higher than for undrained procedures (p < 0.042). The use of a drain did not influence the post-operative levels of haemoglobin, the revision rates, Harris hip scores, the length of hospital stay or the incidence of thromboembolism. We conclude that drains provide no clear advantage at total hip arthroplasty, represent an additional cost, and expose patients to a higher risk of transfusion.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. K. Smith, D. H. Williams, and V. G. Langkamer Post-operative blood salvage with autologous retransfusion in primary total hip replacement J Bone Joint Surg Br, August 1, 2007; 89-B(8): 1092 - 1097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]