Search

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of drains used in current clinical practice on operation parameters and post-operative morbidity. The comprehensive data obtained through the prospective design were analysed in detail according to whether abdominal drainage was applied. Abdominal drainage was present in 44.1% of patients who met the inclusion criteria. Drains were placed significantly more frequently during oncologic surgery ( p  = .007). The mean mobilisation ( p  = .001), first flatus ( p  = .001), and first oral intake ( p  = .029) times were longer in the drain group than those in the non-drain group. In patients who underwent oncological surgeries, no significant differences were observed except for the pre-operative duration of bowel preparation ( p  = .006) and first flatus time ( p  = .003). Our results suggest that drain placement in gynecological procedures does not provide an additional advantage.IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject? Post-operative drainage of the abdominal cavity has been controversial for many years. However, whether abdominal drainage provides an additional benefit in lower and upper abdominal surgical procedures remains unclear. What do the results of this study add? Most studies have examined post-operative pain and surgical site infections. We examined the relationship between abdominal drainage and demographic and pre-/post-operative clinical features in detail. We demonstrated that abdominal drainage in gynecological procedures may not provide an additional advantage. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The present study provides valuable information that can guide physicians in deciding whether to use post-operative abdominal drainage. This topic warrants investigation with randomised data in the future.