Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for At-Risk Surgical Closures in Patients With Multiple Comorbidities
Authors:
- Jesse GoldsteinJGJesse Goldstein
- Mathew EndaraMEMathew Endara
- Kyle XuKXKyle Xu
- John SteinbergJSJohn Steinberg
- Christopher AttingerCAChristopher Attinger
- 1 June 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Annals of Surgery
- Vol. 255 (6) , 1043-1047
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) on closed surgical incisions. We performed a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing NPWT to standard dry dressings on surgical incisions. Patients presenting to a high-volume wound center were randomized to receive either a V.A.C. (KCI, San Antonio, TX) or a standard dry dressing over their incision at the conclusion of surgery. These were primarily high-risk patients with multiple comorbidities. The 2 groups were compared, and all incisions were evaluated for infection and dehiscence postoperatively. Eighty-one patients were included for analysis. Thirty-seven received dry dressings, and 44 received NPWT. Seventy-four of these underwent lower extremity wound closure. Average follow-up was 113 days. There were no differences in demographic, preoperative, and operative variables between groups; 6.8% of the NPWT group and 13.5% of the dry dressing group developed wound infection, but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.46). There was no difference in time to develop infection between the groups. There was no statistical difference in dehiscence between NPWT and dry dressing group (36.4% vs 29.7%; P = 0.54) or mean time to dehiscence between the 2 groups (P = 0.45). Overall, 35% of the dry dressing group and 40% of the NPWT group had a wound infection, dehiscence, or both. Of these, 9 in the NPWT group (21%) and 8 in the dry dressing group (22%) required reoperation. There is a significant rate of postoperative infection and dehiscence in patients with multiple comorbidities. There was no difference in the incidence of infection or dehiscence between the NPWT and dry dressing group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. The unique registration number is NCT01366105.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- A new negative pressure dressing (PrevenaTM) to prevent wound complications following lower limb distal arterial bypassBritish Journal of Diabetes, 2011
- Moisture BalanceAdvances in Skin & Wound Care, 2009
- Negative pressure wound therapy promoted healing of diabetic foot ulcers more than advanced moist wound therapyCommentaryEvidence-Based Nursing, 2008
- Vacuum Assisted Closure Device Improves the Take of Mesh Grafts in Chronic Leg Ulcer PatientsDermatology, 2008
- Securing Skin Grafts to Microvascular Free Flaps Using the Vacuum-Assisted Closure (VAC) DeviceAnnals of Plastic Surgery, 2007
- Efficacy of Negative Pressure Therapy to Enhance Take of 1-Stage Allodermis and a Split-Thickness GraftAnnals of Plastic Surgery, 2007
- Effectiveness of Negative Pressure Closure in the Integration of Split Thickness Skin GraftsAnnals of Surgery, 2006
- Incisional Vacuum-Assisted Closure TherapyJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 2006
- Verbesserte Einheilrate von Mesh-graft-Transplantaten bei Patienten mit Ulcus cruris durch postoperativen Einsatz von VakuumversiegelungZentralblatt fur Chirurgie, 2006
- Lower-extremity amputation in diabetes. The independent effects of peripheral vascular disease, sensory neuropathy, and foot ulcers.Diabetes Care, 1999