Reservoir left in place after revision

[Jollyhellfarter]

Please read:
Attention was then turned to removal of the reservoir. The tubing was traced into the right groin. The reservoir was extremely high. During dissection, the tubing snapped and the tubing to the reservoir retracted and was unable to be re-grasped. The reservoir had been previously drained. We therefore elected to retain the reservoir in situ as there was no evidence of infection.
I believe I am now looking at serious potential for the hose that broke off to cause life threatening picture of an intestine or perhaps even kill me. The hoses and previous device was Titan.
What are your thoughts?

[lasthope2.0]

Drain and Retain strategy for reservoirs is quite common during IPP revision surgeries. It all boils down to what is less risky for the patient.

Here’s a 2026 paper on it. I’ve added a short summary below, which may be easier to read.

https://academic.oup.com/jsm/article-ab ... m=fulltext

Summary of the IPP “Drain and Retain” Study

The study examined IPP revision surgery and the “drain and retain” technique, where the old reservoir is drained or decommissioned and left in place rather than surgically removed. Researchers reviewed 233 revision cases across 7 high-volume U.S. centers from July 2016 to September 2024. Of these, 112 patients had drain-and-retain and 121 underwent complete reservoir removal. Patients undergoing surgery for an active prosthesis infection were excluded. Average follow-up was about 12.6 months. There were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative infection, device malfunction, or migration of the new reservoir. No complications were directly attributed to the retained old reservoirs.

Bottom line: Drain-and-retain appears comparably safe in the short term for non-infected IPP revisions and may avoid the additional risks of removing a deeply scarred reservoir. Longer-term safety still requires further study.