Abstract
Objective: To determine whether suction drainage is safe and effective compared with no-drainage in total knee arthroplasty. Methods: The literature search was based on PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Highwire, the Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WFSD.The data were analysed using RevMan 5.3.Fourteen randomised controlled trials involving 1 009 knees were included in our analysis. Results: Suction drainage increases the rate and volume of blood transfusion.No-drainage group increases the rate of wound problems (OR=1.92, 95%CI 1.21-3.04, P<0.05). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of periprosthetic infection (OR=0.68, 95%CI 0.20-2.30, P=0.54), VAS (OR=-0.09, 95%CI -0.32-0.14, P=0.46) and the length of stay (OR=0.41, 95%CI -0.21-1.03; P=0.19) when the drainage group was compared with the no-drainage group (P>0.05). Conclusions: No-drainage for easy total knee arthroplasty may be a better choice. However, orthopedic surgeon need to weigh the pros and cons of no-drainage in some complicated TKAs such as extra-articular deformity .
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
