Purpose: Traditionally, abdominal drainage (AD) is routinely inserted in patients after liver transplantation (LT) to drain ascites and to detect postoperative hemorrhage and bile leakage. However, the benefit of this surgical practice remains a matter of debate regarding potential drainage-associated morbidities.
Methods: In a retrospective pair-matched analysis in a 1:1 ratio, 116 patients after LT were assessed with regards to benefits and risks of abdominal drainage under immunosuppression, respecting model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), age, and gender.
Results: The indications for LT were comparable between the drain and the no-drain group. There was an increased rate of early bile leakage in patients with abdominal drainage (13.8 vs. 1.7%, p = 0.032). In addition, a significantly higher incidence of infections requiring antibiotic therapy was observed in the drain group (63.8 vs. 39.7%, p = 0.015). The contribution of drains as a diagnostic tool was marginal, as in the drain group, other diagnostic tools than the drain itself confirmed 50% of all early bile leakages and 60% of postoperative hemorrhages. Overall, there was no difference regarding the incidence of incisional hernia after LT (8.6 vs. 10.3%, p = 1.000), length of hospital stay (22.9 ± 18.7 vs. 18.6 ± 18.6 days, p = 0.215), and 1- and 5-year patient (p = 0.981) and graft survival (p = 0.092).
Conclusions: Equal results can be achieved with or without an abdominal drain in recipients with whole-liver grafts in spite of an increased risk of postoperative infection and biliary leakage in the former group. A benefit of AD as a diagnostic tool could not be demonstrated.
Keywords: Abdominal drainage; Bile leakage; Infections; Liver transplantation.