PriMera Scientific Medicine and Public Health (ISSN: 2833-5627)

Research Article

Volume 3 Issue 5

Modified Radical Mastectomy in Female Breast Cancer - A Relative Clinical Outcomes of Half Versus Full Vacuum Suction Drainage

Md. Latiful Bari*, Chishti Tanhar Bakth Choudhury, Saifuddin Ahmed and Samia Mubin

October 11, 2023

DOI : 10.56831/PSMPH-03-095


Background: Vacuum suction drainage is an obligatory practice following mastectomy for breast cancer. recent studies showing that the pressure of the vacuum suction drainage is of value in determining the volume of seroma formation and thereby the drain indwelling time, duration of hospital stays and patient morbidity. Half vacuum suction may be of greater value in this regard comparing full vacuum suction drainage.

Objectives: To assess and compare the clinical outcome of half versus full vacuum suction drainage following modified radical mastectomy in breast cancer.

Methods: Forty patients of histologically proven breast cancer had been chosen purposively and systematically randomized in two equal groups. Group A with half vacuum suction (device was squeezed up to half of its vertical length) and Group B with full vacuum suction (device was squeezed to its maximum). The outcome measured were postoperative drainage, drain indwelling time and post-surgery length of hospital stay.

Results: Patients having half vacuum suction had a significantly reduced mean total drainage volume (364.25 ± 128.52 ml versus 822.00 ± 251.30 ml), drain indwelling time (5.50 ± 1.32 days versus 9.05 ± 1.90 days) and post-surgery hospital stay (7.15 ± 2.58 days versus 10.25 ± 2.55 days) in comparison to the full vacuum suction group.

Conclusion: low vacuum suction drain ensures a lower drain collection and were removed earlier and hence reduced the length of hospital stay significantly than high vacuum suction drains.

Keywords: Breast cancer; modified radical mastectomy; vacuum suction drainage; seroma; Drain Indwelling Time (DIT); Length of Hospital Stay (LOS)


  1. Srivastava V, Basu S and Shukla V. “Seroma Formation after Breast Cancer Surgery: What We Have Learned in the Last Two Decades”. Journal of Breast Cancer 15.4 (2012): 373-80.
  2. Hossain M, Ferdous S and Karim-Kos H. “Breast cancer in South Asia: A Bangladeshi perspective”. Cancer Epidemiology 38.5 (2014): 465-470.
  3. Chintamani., et al. “Half versus full vacuum suction drainage after modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer- a prospective randomized clinical trial [ISRCTN24484328]”. BMC Cancer 5.1 (2005).
  4. Gumus M., et al. “Factors Affecting the Postsurgical Length of Hospital Stay in Patients with Breast Cancer”. Journal of Breast Health 11.3 (2015): 128-131.
  5. Uslukaya O., et al. “Factors that Affect Drain Indwelling Time after Breast Cancer Surgery”. Journal of Breast Health 12.3 (2016): 102-106.
  6. Bonnema J., et al. “A prospective randomized trial of high versus low vacuum drainage after axillary dissection for breast cancer”. The American Journal of Surgery 173.2 (1997): 76-79.
  7. Van Heurn L and Brink P. “Prospective randomized trial of high versus low vacuum drainage after axillary lymphadenectomy”. British Journal of Surgery 82.7 (1995): 931-932.
  8. Morris A. “A controlled trial of closed wound suction drainage in radical mastectomy”. British Journal of Surgery 60.5 (1973): 357-359.
  9. Kopelman D., et al. “Postoperative Suction Drainage of the Axilla: for How Long? Prospective Randomised Trial”. The European Journal of Surgery 165.2 (1999): 117-120.
  10. Mansoor J., et al. “Impact of low versus high vacuum suction drainage on duration of hospital stay after modified radical mastectomy”. PAFMJ 65.5 (2015): 604-609.
  11. Cameron AE., et al. “Suction drainage of the axilla: a prospective randomized trial”. Br J surg 75.12 (1988): 1211.
  12. Tadych K and Donegan WL. “Postmastectomy seromas and wound drainage”. surg Gynecol obstet 165.6 (1987): 483-487.
  13. Atikin DR, Hunsaker R and James AG. “Prevention of seromas following mastectomy and axillary dissection”. Surg Gynecol Obstet 158.4 (1984): 327-330.