A retrospective analysis compares drainage and non-drainage methods in AIS surgery, suggesting non-drainage as superior.
This single-center retrospective analysis was designed to evaluate the outcome of closed-suction wound drainage following posterior spinal fusion with internal instrumentation for mild to moderate adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Eighty-six AIS patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion were divided into two cohorts: submuscular closed-suction wound drainage (n = 35) and simple compressed dressing clothes without wound drainage (n = 51). These two cohorts were thoroughly compared in terms of demographic distribution and perioperative blood loss, including hemoglobin and hematocrit levels and blood transfusion volumes. Additionally, the incidence of wound-related problems (pyrexia and wound complications), duration of hospital stay, and lumbar function evaluation (lumbar mobility and SRS-22 questionnaire scores) were assessed during long-term follow-up. The drainage group had significantly lower hemoglobin (93.73 g/L vs. 99.95 g/L, P = 0.01) and hematocrit levels (27.75% vs. 29.94%, P < 0.01) on the third postoperative day, as well as a significantly higher postoperative blood transfusion volume (40.0 ml vs. 23.5 ml, P = 0.011) compared to the non-drainage group. Furthermore, the duration of hospital stay was significantly longer in the drainage group than in the non-drainage group (10.9 d vs. 8.0 d, P < 0.01). In contrast, the two groups were statistically similar regarding duration of fever (0.9 d vs. 1.2 d, P = 0.268), incidence of wound problems, latest lumbar mobility (42.79° vs. 44.97°, P = 0.586), and scores of function/activity domain (2.39 vs. 2.08, P = 0.336) and pain domain (1.76 vs. 1.66, P = 0.734) in the SRS-22 questionnaire. Routine closed-suction drainage significantly increased blood loss and hospital stay without obviously improving wound healing or functional outcomes. Utilizing simple compressed dressings without drainage was a clinically superior and resource-efficient alternative for posterior AIS fusion, particularly in uncomplicated primary surgeries for mild to moderate deformities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wenbo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: