DRAIN VERSUS NO DRAIN FOLLOWING ELECTIVE ABDOMINAL SURGERY: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS

Abstract

drains are traditionally employed to detect early complications and prevent fluid collection, their role in uncomplicated
elective procedures has been increasingly questioned due to potential discomfort, infection risk, and prolonged hospital
stay. Objective: To compare postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery
with routine drain placement and those without drains. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted
in a tertiary care hospital over an 18-month period. A total of 56 patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery were
included and divided into two groups: drain group [n = 28] and no-drain group [n = 28]. Postoperative outcomes assessed
included surgical site infection, seroma or collection, postoperative pain scores, time to ambulation, and length
of hospital stay. Statistical analysis was performed using appropriate parametric and non-parametric tests, with a p
value <0.05 considered significant. Results: The incidence of surgical site infection was comparable between the
drain and no-drain groups [14.3% vs 10.7%]. Seroma formation occurred in 3 patients in the drain group and 2 patients
in the no-drain group. Mean postoperative pain scores were higher in the drain group on postoperative day one
[5.1 ± 0.9 vs 3.8 ± 0.8]. The mean hospital stay was significantly longer in patients with drains [6.2 ± 1.4 days] compared
to those without drains [4.5 ± 1.2 days]. No significant difference was observed in major postoperative complications
between the two groups. Conclusion: Routine drain placement following uncomplicated elective abdominal
surgery does not confer a clear advantage in reducing postoperative complications and may be associated with increased
pain and prolonged hospital stay. Selective rather than routine use of drains appears to be a more appropriate
strategy.