Incisional negative pressure wound therapy does not reduce surgical site infections in abdominal midline incisions: a case control study

The use of incisional negative pressure wound therapy on high-risk breast cancer mastectomy patients

BACKGROUND

The main complications seen in patients who have undergone modified radical mastectomy (MRM) are seroma, surgical site infection, hematoma, wound dehiscence, flap necrosis, and nerve damage. While these complications lead to some problems the most feared effect in the early period is that they cause a delay in adjuvant treatment. Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (iNPWT) decreases wound dehiscence by reducing oedema and tension, especially in the incision line. This study aim to compare recovery times and wound site complications between patients treated with conventional wound dressings and patients treated with iNPWT after MRM.

METHODS

A retrospective screening was made of the data of 50 patients who underwent MRM because of breast cancer in the General Surgery Clinic of XXX Hospital between 2018 and 2022, and were at high-risk of wound site complications. Two groups were formed as 30 patients applied with iNPWT and 20 patients applied with conventional dressings.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 50 female patients was 53.58 years (range, 30-80 years). The most frequently seen complications were seroma (20 patients) and partial flap ischaemia (14 patients). The mean number of iNPWT applications was 1.30 (range, 1-2), and the mean number of days of application was 4.47 (range, 2-9). Postoperative seroma was observed in 8 patients in the iNPWT group and in 12 patients in the conventional dressings group (p = 0.018). Flap ischaemia and the probability of dehiscence was determined at a statistically significantly higher rate in the patients in the conventional dressings groups (p = 0.005, p = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrated that the use of iNPWT significantly reduced the amount of postoperative drainage, thereby contributing to early drain removal. Furthermore, iNPWT significantly reduced postoperative seroma, flap ischaemia, and flap dehiscence compared to conventional dressings.

Does prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy prevent surgical site infection in abdominal surgery?

OBJECTIVE

To determine if prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy (pNPWT) allows for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs) in abdominal surgery.

METHOD

A non-systematic review assessing the evidence was conducted in 2020.

RESULTS

Retrospectve studies comparing patients with pNPWT with patients receiving standard wound dressing after abdominal surgery showed encouragning results in favour of pNPWT for reducing the incidence of SSIs, but randomised controlled trials have so far reported mixed results.

CONCLUSION

New randomised controlled trials including a sufficient number of patients at risk of SSIs are needed for confirming the results of non-interventional studies.

Prophylactic Negative-pressure Wound Therapy Prevents Surgical Site Infection in Abdominal Surgery: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) is a public health challenge. Our objective was to determine if prophylactic negative-pressure wound therapy (pNPWT) allows preventing SSI after laparotomy.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Web of Science were searched on 6 October 2019 for original studies reporting the incidences of SSI in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery with and without pNPWT. Risk differences (RDs) between control and pNPWT patients and risk ratios (RRs) for SSI were obtained using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (2930 patients, 5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 16 observational studies) were retained for the analysis. Pooled RD between patients with and without pNPWT was -12% (95% confidence interval [CI], -17% to -8%; I2 = 57%; P < .00001) in favor of pNPWT. That risk difference was -12% (95% CI, -22% to -1%; I2 = 69%; P = .03) when pooling only RCTs (792 patients). pNPWT was protective against the incidence of SSI with a RR of 0.53 (95% CI, .40-.71; I2 = 56%; P < .0001). The effect on pNPWT was more pronounced in studies with an incidence of SSI ≥20% in the control arm. The preventive effect of pNPWT on SSI remained after correction for potential publication bias. However, when pooling only high-quality observational studies (642 patients) or RCTs (527 patients), significance was lost.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing studies suggest that pNPWT on closed wounds is protective against the occurrence of SSI in abdominal surgery, but these findings need to be confirmed by more high-quality evidence, preferentially in subgroups of patients with an incidence of SSI ≥20% in the control arm.

Prophylactic Use of Negative Pressure Therapy in General Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent an economic burden to healthcare systems. The use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for SSI prophylaxis remains uncertain. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science for relevant studies. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the effectiveness of NPWT for prophylaxis of SSI rates in general abdominal surgery. Secondary outcomes were rates of seroma and wound dehiscence, length of hospital stay, and re-admission rates. The statistical analysis was performed with random effect models. Results: A total of 3,193 patients from 20 articles (six randomized controlled trials [RCT], three prospective, eight retrospective, and three ambispective studies) were analyzed. Negative pressure wound therapy was associated with decreased rate of SSIs compared with standard dressing in a pooled analysis of non-randomized studies and RCTs (0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.4 to 0.8; p < 0.001). This result, however, needs to be challenged because of a significant statistical heterogeneity of the included studies (I2 = 71%; p < 0.01). A separate analysis of the six RCTs failed to confirm the superiority of NPWT (0.64; 95% CI, -0.4 to 1.04; p = 0.07), also disclosing significant heterogeneity. The analysis of secondary outcomes was only possible in combination of randomized and non-randomized studies because of incomplete datasets in RCTs. Re-admission rates were lower after NPWT and no difference was observed for the incidence of seroma, wound dehiscence, and length of hospital stay. Conclusions: Based on available evidence, the routine use of NPWT for SSI prophylaxis after laparotomy in general abdominal surgery cannot be generally recommended.

S116: Impact of incisional negative pressure wound therapy on surgical site infection after complex incisional hernia repair: a retrospective matched cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) may reduce surgical site infections (SSI), which can have devastating consequences after incisional hernia repair. Few comparative studies investigate the effectiveness of this wound management strategy in this population. The objective of this study is to determine the effect of iNPWT on the incidence of SSI after complex incisional hernia repair.

METHODS

All adult patients undergoing open incisional hernia repair at a single center from 2016 to 2019 were reviewed. A commercial iNPWT dressing was used at the discretion of the surgeon. Patients were grouped by type of dressing; iNPWT and standard sterile dressings (SSD). Coarsened exact matching was used to create balanced cohorts for comparison using age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, wound classification, and surgical urgency. The primary outcome was the composite incidence of superficial and deep SSI within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included non-infectious surgical site occurrences (SSO), overall complications, length of stay (LOS), emergency department visits, and readmission at 30 days.

RESULTS

134 patients underwent complex hernia repair, with 114 patients included after matching (34 iNPWT, 51 SSD). Composite incidence of superficial and deep SSI was 19.3% (11.8% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.107), with significantly lower rates of deep SSI in patients receiving iNPWT (2.9% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.045). After accounting for residual differences between groups, iNPWT was associated with decreased incidence of composite SSI (RR 0.36, 95% CI [0.16, 0.87]). Median LOS was longer in patients with iNPWT (7 vs. 5 days, p = 0.001). There were no differences in SSO, overall complications, readmission, or emergency department visits.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing incisional hernia repair, the use of iNPWT was associated with a lower incidence of SSI at 30 days. Future studies should focus on cost effectiveness of iNPWT, its impact on long-term hernia recurrences, and the identification of patient selection criteria in this population.