Managing infected seroma post-lymphadenectomy; A retrospective cohort study and cost analysis in melanoma patients

Abstract

Seromas are a common and unavoidable complication following lymphadenectomy, and often become clinically significant with superseded infection requiring re-admission for prompt intervention. However, there is no consensus as to whether a formal surgical incision and drainage (I&D), ultrasound (US)-guided aspiration or intravenous (IV) antibiotics alone is the most efficacious method of managing an infected seroma, the investigation of which formed the rationale for this study. This retrospective cohort study included a consecutive series of patients readmitted for infected seroma following a lymphadenectomy for melanoma at Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust (LTHT) from 2006 to 2017. Details on management, length of hospital stay, length of follow-up and number of clinical appointments required were examined. Seventy-one cases of infected seroma were identified from the cohort of 1691 lymphadenectomies. Initially, 21 patients (29.5%) were managed by IV antibiotics alone (failure rate of 52.4%); 18 (25.4%) with US-guided aspiration (failure rate 27.8%) and 32 (45.1%) with surgical I&D, which was 100% effective. Ultimately, 62.5% of the cohort required surgical management. Patients who underwent surgical I&D were discharged significantly faster following the procedure (3 versus 5 days for US-guided aspiration, p = 0.002) and spent fewer days in hospital overall (p = 0.022). The overall average cost was comparable across the three treatment groups. Surgical management seemed preferential to conservative approaches in terms of efficacy and was not significantly more expensive overall; but carries anaesthetic risk. There may be a clinically significant difference in outcome depending on management; however, more evidence is required to investigate this.