Prophylactic and Therapeutic Usage of Drains in Gynecologic Oncology Procedures: A Comprehensive Review

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

The use of post-operative drainage has been a topic of debate for several years. While the trend has increasingly shifted toward avoiding routine drainage, opinions on its necessity remain divided. The main objective of this comprehensive review is to effectively summarize and present the current knowledge and up-to-date evidence on the role of prophylactic drainage in women undergoing obstetric, oncological, or other types of gynecological surgical procedures in terms of the indications, post-operative surgical infections, morbidity recovery, post-operative complications and outcomes. Prophylactic drainage does not seem to decrease morbidity in cases of lymphadenectomy and radical hysterectomy. Debulking surgery does not necessitate prophylactic drainage in the majority of cases; however, its usage should be individualized based on the surgical complexity. Conflicting evidence exists regarding drains' effectiveness in preventing anastomotic leakage, with high rates of re-operation and abscess formation noted. Despite the fact that vaginal drains may help with hematoma and infectious morbidity, the overall benefit of vaginal and peritoneal drains in preventing post-operative morbidity is questionable. Finally, negative pressure wound therapy may reduce surgical site infection rates in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Although there is still a great need for further investigation, the topic has been covered adequately by many prospective trials and the international guidelines have provided clear suggestions to guide physicians in clinical practice. However, need for individualization and personalized strategies is well emphasized by the published evidence in an effort to balance the benefits and risks of drainage usage determined by the type of surgery and patient status.