Drainage vs no drainage in secondary peritonitis with sepsis following complicated appendicitis in adults in the modern era of antibiotics

Table 1 Preoperative status of the patients

Patient characteristics	Drainage cohort(n = 88)	Non-drainage cohort (n = 121)
Age1 (yr)	29 (14-93)	26 (14-78)
Sex2 (male: female)	1:1.2	1.3:1
Duration of symptoms2 (d)	2.5 ± 1.3	2.1 ± 1.5
WBC count2 (× 109/L)	16.8 ± 4.9	16.1 ± 5.3
Febrile %age (> 37.80 C)	68 (77%)	91 (75%)

¹Expressed as median (years); ²Expressed as an average with the standard deviation.

Table 2 Postoperative status of the patients n (%)

Post operative outcome	Drainage cohort(n = 88)	Non-drainage cohort(n = 121)
Hospital stay1	6.5 (4-8)	4.0 (3-8)
Antibiotic use (parenteral)1	5.0 (4-9)	3.5 (3-6)
Regular analgesic use1	5.0 (4-9)	3.5 (3-6)
Paralytic ileus1 (passing of flatus)	2.5 (1-5)	2.0 (1-4)
Major wound infection	14.0 (15.9)	22.0 (18.18)
Residual intra-abdominal collection	7.0 (8)	13.0 (10.74)
Subacute intestinal obstruction	3.0 (3.4)	5.0 (4.13)
Faecal fistula	1.0 (1.1)	-
Incisional hernia	2.0 (2.2)	2.0 (1.6)
Mortality	1.0 (0.82)

¹Are expressed as median (d).P> 0.05 (insignificant).

Table 3 Clinico-pathological profile of patients requiring second surgery n (%)

Indications	Duration1(n = 88)	Drainage cohort (n = 121)	Non-drainage cohort
Subacute intestinalobstruction	28-35 d	1 (1.1)	1 (0.82)
Incisional hernia	6-11 mo	2 (2.2)	2 (1.60)

¹Period after the primary surgery.