Canada’s Drug Agency | Drugs, Health Technologies and Systems.
Canada’s Drug Agency | Drugs, Health Technologies and Systems.

Gravity Drainage Versus Forced Suction Drainage for Patients With Excess Fluid in Pleural or Peritoneal Spaces

Details

Files
Project Line:
Health Technology Review
Project Sub Line:
Summary with Critical Appraisal
Project Number:
RC1327-000

Question

  1. What is the comparative clinical effectiveness of draining pleural or peritoneal spaces with gravity compared with forced suction?
  2. What are the evidence-based guidelines regarding the drainage of pleural or peritoneal spaces using gravity or forced suction?

Key Message

The evidence for chest drainage with gravity compared with forced suction was mixed. Two randomized controlled trials included in 2 systematic reviews with meta-analysis suggested that there is no difference between chest drainage with gravity versus forced suction regarding the risk of prolonged air leak, or post-operative pneumothorax and the duration of chest tube drainage, or hospital stay, following lung cancer surgery. However, 1 randomized controlled trial included in a systematic review with meta-analysis suggested that chest drainage with gravity resulted in a shorter duration of chest tube drainage and hospital stay compared to forced suction following lung cancer surgery. One guideline suggests that chest drainage with forced suction does not provide additional benefits for patients undergoing lung surgery compared to gravity drainage. There is a lack of relevant literature and guidelines on the clinical effectiveness or use of abdominal space drainage with gravity or forced suction.

Files

Gravity Drainage Versus Forced Suction Drainage for Patients With Excess Fluid in Pleural or Peritoneal Spaces Rapid Response January 29, 2021 View PDF
Last Updated : February 8, 2021