Background: Modified radical mastectomy still remains the most common surgical procedure employed in definitive management of breast cancer. Post mastectomy problems include skin flap necrosis, prolonged axillary drainage, seroma formation, wound gaping etc., among all seroma is commonest. Drainage usage and dressing applied after this procedure is debatable due to varying recommendations.Methods: A prospective randomized control trial was conducted on 84 FNAC/TRUECUT biopsy proven cases of early and locally advanced breast cancer patients admitted in surgery department, GSVM Medical College, Kanpur over a period of two years. Aiming to compare full suction drainage and compression dressing (n=42) (group 1) with half suction drainage and non-compression dressing (n=34) (group 2), in terms of post-operative morbidities like skin flap necrosis, prolonged axillary drainage, seroma formation, wound gaping and length of hospital stay. Romsons 16 number Romovac drains were used for suction and 2 elastic 6” crape bandage were used for compression.Results: During follow-up there was significant lower incidence of seroma formation in group 1 patients compared to group 2 patients (p<0.0019). Full compression dressing patients have increased incidence of superficial skin necrosis compared to non-compression dressing patients (p<0.022). Patients with half suction drainage and non-compression dressing has early drain removal than patients with full suction drainage and compression dressing (p<0.05), the length of hospital stay was less in group 2 compared to group 1.Conclusions: There is markedly lesser incidence of post-operative seroma formation along with reduced morbidity in the form of patients discomfort and flap necrosis in post MRM patients with full suction drainage and compression dressing, but it requires a greater hospital stay and has slightly higher risk of superficial skin necrosis which can be easily managed with topical ointments, compared to patients with half suction drainage and non-compression dressing.

Background: Fistula-in-ano is very common benign anal condition in day to day surgical practice which is treatable. The treatment is challenging even for an experienced surgeons due to its chronic and recurring nature. There are various treatment modalities available for management of anal fistula. Our aim is to study the outcome of fistulotomy and fistulectomy in patients with simple low-lying fistula. Methods: A prospective Randomised clinical study was done on 55 patients, they were randomized into two groups of fistulotomy (n=25) and fistulectomy (n=30) in GSVM medical college over a period of two years. Aim of the study was to compare the operative time, healing time, treatment outcome, complications and recurrence rate. The results were analyzed using SPSS version 22 using tests like student's t test and chi square test. Results: The mean operative time of fistulotomy was 18.3 minutes and that of fistulectomy was 34.2 minutes, which is statistically significant ( p-value =0.008).Duration of healing in fistulotomy group (11 days) compared to fistulectomy group (22 days), which is statistically significant (p<0.001).Incidence of incontinence in fistulotomy group observed in 2 cases and in fistulectomy group was observed in 3 cases , which is insignificant (p-value=.797)There was recurrence in one case in both the groups in six months of follow-up period. Conclusion: Fistulotomy is better for treating low fistula-in-ano in terms of high healing rate, shorter operating time, shorter healing time which ultimately reduces the hospital stay and incidence of complications is comparable in both the groups.