Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162016000500547 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: To evaluate bleeding and the estimated blood loss in patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) with different closed suction drains (3.2-mm and 4.8-mm gauge). METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial with 22 patients who underwent TKR and were divided into two groups: Group I, with 11 patients in whom the 3.2-mm suction drain was used, and Group II, with 11 patients in whom the 4.8-mm suction drain was used. The hematocrit was measured after 24, 48 and 72 h after surgery in order to calculate the estimated blood loss. The drained volume was measured 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after TKR, and thereafter both groups were compared. RESULTS: Regarding the hematocrit, there were no differences between groups in measured periods (24, 48, and 72 h after surgery). The total bleeding measured at the suction drains within 48 h was higher in Group II, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.005); in the first 24 h, there was major bleeding in Group II (mean 893 mL), with a significant difference (p = 0.004). Between 24 and 48 h, there was no statistically significant difference in both groups (p = 0.710). The total estimated bleeding was higher in Group I, with mean of 463 mL, versus 409 mL in Group II, with no statistical significance (p = 0.394). CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding was higher in the group that used the 4.8 mm gauge suction drain, with no differences in hematocrit and estimated blood loss. |
id |
SBOT-2_6b5a767f63dc528505c62161fc87763d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0102-36162016000500547 |
network_acronym_str |
SBOT-2 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gaugesBlood loss/surgicalArthroplasty/replacement/kneeDrainageABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: To evaluate bleeding and the estimated blood loss in patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) with different closed suction drains (3.2-mm and 4.8-mm gauge). METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial with 22 patients who underwent TKR and were divided into two groups: Group I, with 11 patients in whom the 3.2-mm suction drain was used, and Group II, with 11 patients in whom the 4.8-mm suction drain was used. The hematocrit was measured after 24, 48 and 72 h after surgery in order to calculate the estimated blood loss. The drained volume was measured 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after TKR, and thereafter both groups were compared. RESULTS: Regarding the hematocrit, there were no differences between groups in measured periods (24, 48, and 72 h after surgery). The total bleeding measured at the suction drains within 48 h was higher in Group II, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.005); in the first 24 h, there was major bleeding in Group II (mean 893 mL), with a significant difference (p = 0.004). Between 24 and 48 h, there was no statistically significant difference in both groups (p = 0.710). The total estimated bleeding was higher in Group I, with mean of 463 mL, versus 409 mL in Group II, with no statistical significance (p = 0.394). CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding was higher in the group that used the 4.8 mm gauge suction drain, with no differences in hematocrit and estimated blood loss.Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia2016-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162016000500547Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.51 n.5 2016reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)instacron:SBOT10.1016/j.rboe.2016.08.014info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLeao,Marcos George de SouzaPedroza Neta,Gladys MartinsSilva,Thiago Montenegro daFerreira,Yacov Machado CostaDias,Waryla Raissa Vasconceloseng2016-11-18T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-36162016000500547Revistahttp://www.rbo.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||rbo@sbot.org.br1982-43780102-3616opendoar:2016-11-18T00:00Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
title |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
spellingShingle |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges Leao,Marcos George de Souza Blood loss/surgical Arthroplasty/replacement/knee Drainage |
title_short |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
title_full |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
title_fullStr |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
title_full_unstemmed |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
title_sort |
Does the suction drain diameter matter? Bleeding analysis after total knee replacement comparing different suction drain gauges |
author |
Leao,Marcos George de Souza |
author_facet |
Leao,Marcos George de Souza Pedroza Neta,Gladys Martins Silva,Thiago Montenegro da Ferreira,Yacov Machado Costa Dias,Waryla Raissa Vasconcelos |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Pedroza Neta,Gladys Martins Silva,Thiago Montenegro da Ferreira,Yacov Machado Costa Dias,Waryla Raissa Vasconcelos |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Leao,Marcos George de Souza Pedroza Neta,Gladys Martins Silva,Thiago Montenegro da Ferreira,Yacov Machado Costa Dias,Waryla Raissa Vasconcelos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Blood loss/surgical Arthroplasty/replacement/knee Drainage |
topic |
Blood loss/surgical Arthroplasty/replacement/knee Drainage |
description |
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: To evaluate bleeding and the estimated blood loss in patients who underwent total knee replacement (TKR) with different closed suction drains (3.2-mm and 4.8-mm gauge). METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial with 22 patients who underwent TKR and were divided into two groups: Group I, with 11 patients in whom the 3.2-mm suction drain was used, and Group II, with 11 patients in whom the 4.8-mm suction drain was used. The hematocrit was measured after 24, 48 and 72 h after surgery in order to calculate the estimated blood loss. The drained volume was measured 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after TKR, and thereafter both groups were compared. RESULTS: Regarding the hematocrit, there were no differences between groups in measured periods (24, 48, and 72 h after surgery). The total bleeding measured at the suction drains within 48 h was higher in Group II, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.005); in the first 24 h, there was major bleeding in Group II (mean 893 mL), with a significant difference (p = 0.004). Between 24 and 48 h, there was no statistically significant difference in both groups (p = 0.710). The total estimated bleeding was higher in Group I, with mean of 463 mL, versus 409 mL in Group II, with no statistical significance (p = 0.394). CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding was higher in the group that used the 4.8 mm gauge suction drain, with no differences in hematocrit and estimated blood loss. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-10-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162016000500547 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162016000500547 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1016/j.rboe.2016.08.014 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.51 n.5 2016 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT) instacron:SBOT |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT) |
instacron_str |
SBOT |
institution |
SBOT |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||rbo@sbot.org.br |
_version_ |
1752122360467554304 |