Quality of life and scar evolution after negative pressure or conventional therapy for wound dehiscence following post-bariatric abdominoplasty

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy Versus Traditional Dressings for Low Transverse Abdominal Incisions Healing by Primary Closure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) devices may reduce wound healing complications when applied to closed surgical incisions. The aim of this review was to assess the effects of ciNPT versus standard dressings in patients undergoing primary closure of high tension, lower transverse abdominal incisions. Methods: This review was registered a priori on PROSPERO (CRD42021252048). A search of the following databases was performed in February 2021: Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Unpublished trials were searched using clinicaltrials.gov. All randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing ciNPT to standard dressings were included. Two independent reviewers performed screening and data extraction. Outcomes evaluated the incidence of wound dehiscence, surgical site infection, total abdominal complications, time to drain removal, and seroma formation. Main Results: Ten studies were included in quantitative and narrative synthesis. Observational study evidence suggests ciNPT likely reduces the incidence of wound dehiscence (odds ratio [OR] 0.57 [0.44-0.96], P = .03) and total abdominal complications (OR 0.34 [0.21-0.54], P < .01). Decreased incidence of seroma formation favored ciNPT (OR 0.65 [0.24-1.76], P = .40); however, this did not achieve significance. Randomized and non-randomized study evidence was very uncertain about the effect of ciNPT on the remaining outcomes. Conclusions: The current best randomized study evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ciNPT on these outcomes. Observational study evidence suggests ciNPT likely results in a statistically significant reduction in abdominal wound dehiscence and total abdominal complications. Additional randomized trials are warranted to limit the impact of bias on the overall certainty of the evidence.

Postoperative negative-pressure incision therapy after liver transplant (PONILITRANS study): A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications of surgical incisions are frequent in liver transplantation. However, evidence justifying the use of incisional negative pressure wound therapy to improve surgical wound outcomes remains limited.

METHODS

Participating patients were randomly assigned to receive incisional negative pressure wound therapy or standard surgical dressing on the closed surgical incision of the liver transplantation. The primary endpoint was surgical site infection incidence 30 days postoperatively. The secondary endpoints included surgical site events (ie, surgical site infection, dehiscence, hematoma, and seroma) and wound quality of life.

RESULTS

Between December 2018 and September 2021, 108 patients (54 in the incisional negative pressure wound therapy group and 54 in the control group) were enrolled in this study. The incidence of surgical site infection at 30 days postoperatively was 7.4% in the treatment group and 13% in the control group (P = .34). The rate of surgical site events was similar in the treatment in the and control group (27.8% vs 29.6%, P = .83). In relation to wound quality of life, the mean score was 75.20 ± 7.27 in the incisional negative pressure wound therapy group and 72.82 ± 10.57 in the control group (P = .23).

CONCLUSION

The prophylactic use of negative pressure wound therapy on primarily closed incisions did not significantly reduce incisional surgical site infection and surgical site event rates after liver transplantation compared with standard surgical dressings.

The Effectiveness of Negative Pressure Therapy: Nursing Approach

INTRODUCTION

Complex wounds require advanced techniques for their management and care. Wound care costs are high, so healthcare professionals need to be aware of available therapies. Negative pressure therapy is a technology for which more and more data on its effectiveness in complex wounds are being collected.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this review were to analyze if the application of negative pressure therapy in complex wounds is effective; to compare the effectiveness of negative pressure therapy with other conventional treatments, as well as its combination with other therapies; and to evaluate the quality of life of patients undergoing negative pressure therapy and collect their main characteristics.

METHODOLOGY

A bibliographic review focused on articles published between November 2015 and June 2022 was carried out. The following databases were consulted: PubMed (Medline), Google Scholar, Web of Science (WOS), Scielo and Scopus.

RESULTS

The most used pressures in the studies coincide at -125 mmHg and in the range of -125 mmHg to -150 mmHg. In the pediatric population, pressure levels vary by age group. A pressure of -75 to -125 mmHg is recommended for children over 12 years of age, and -50 to -75 mmHg is recommended for children under 2 years of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative pressure therapy stands out for its rapid rate of granulation, the prevention and effective treatment of infections, the variety and malleability of dressings, its various applications and the possibility of using it with other therapies to accelerate wound closure.

The Impact of Acne, Atopic Dermatitis, Skin Toxicities and Scars on Quality of Life and the Importance of a Holistic Treatment Approach

Skin conditions such as acne, atopic dermatitis, skin toxicity from oncology treatment, and scars are among the most common health conditions and negatively impact quality of life (QoL). Yet the physician perception of this impact often varies greatly from the patient perception. This is important because patient illness perception is closely linked with seeking help and treatment adherence behaviors. The objective of this review is to better understand the impact of these four highly prevalent skin conditions on QoL including their health-related economic factors to improve treatment outcomes. The literature search included literature published on QoL with acne, atopic dermatitis, scars (from any cause) and skin toxicities on PubMed between 2015 and 2020. We found that patients with skin conditions have a much higher frequency of altered QoL and psychological distress than those without. Also, skin conditions negatively impact self-image and can cause feelings of isolation, loneliness, lower self-esteem, and lower body satisfaction. Additionally, physical discomfort adds to the psychological distress. These physical and psychological impacts are an enormous financial burden on patients, their families and society. We found evidence that holistic treatment including treating the skin condition itself, providing wider peer and psychological support as well as shared decision-making, therapeutic patient education and dermatologist involvement improves outcomes. Holistic history-taking, checklists, or the use of more formal QoL scoring tools can be incorporated into routine consultations to better assess patient well-being and provide clinicians with important information for adapting treatment to individual patient requirements. In conclusion, this review highlights the overall impact of skin conditions (including psychological and QoL impacts) and the importance of providing holistic care to optimize treatment outcomes. A comprehensive QoL screening tool would be useful to help provide patient-centered treatment.

Clinical Evaluation of Scar Quality Following the Use of Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Obese Women Undergoing Cesarean Delivery: A Trial-Based Scar Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cosmetic result of using incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) compared with standard postsurgical dressings in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

Postcesarean scars were objectively evaluated 6 and 12 months postsurgery by a plastic surgeon using the Manchester Scar Scale and the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale. Subjective scar evaluation and health-related quality of life were assessed using the Patient Scar Assessment Scale and the EQ-5D-5L instrument, respectively. Main outcome measures were the cosmetic and functional outcome of treating a standardized surgical wound with iNPWT compared with standard dressings, changes in scar rating over time, and testing different scar scales for cosmetic evaluation.

RESULTS

The study found no difference in long-term cosmetic outcomes between iNPWT and standard dressings. The study demonstrated a statistically significant positive change in scar rating from surgery to 12 months postsurgery. A strong association was found between the scar scales with a high correlation between the objective scar scales (R approximately 0.80) and a moderate correlation between the subjective scale and each objective scale (R approximately 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic iNPWT has been found to reduce the risk of surgical site infection following CD. Conversely, this study was not able to detect a difference in the long-term cosmetic result after CD when compared with standard dressings.

Evaluation of inguinal vascular surgical scars treated with closed incisional negative pressure wound therapy using three-dimensional digital imaging-A randomized controlled trial on bilateral incisions

PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION

Scar formation is an important, permanent surrogate marker for wound healing. The main aim of this randomized trial was to evaluate the effects of incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) on scar formation in uncomplicated wound healing with 3-dimensional (3D) digital imaging.

BASIC PROCEDURES

Patients undergoing bilateral inguinal incisions after vascular surgery were randomized to receive iNPWT and standard dressing on separate sides. The incisional scars were documented at a median time of 808 days (range 394-1194) after surgery with 3D photography, which were objectively evaluated by two plastic surgeons using the Stony Brook scar evaluation scale (SBSES) and a 10-point graded numeric ranking scale (NRS10). Subjective evaluation was performed with the patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patients with surgical site infection or other wound complications were excluded to minimize bias. The p-values were calculated using McNemar's and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired nominal and paired continuous data, respectively.

MAIN FINDINGS

Among 33 patients, 32 patients had undergone endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and 31 patients had transverse inguinal incisions. Objective and subjective scar evaluation showed no difference between iNPWT and standard dressing. In objective scorings, 18.8 and 21.9% received the highest possible SBSES total score in the iNPWT and standard dressing groups, while 43.8 and 37.5% received the highest possible NRS10 score, respectively. The inter-rater reliability between the two assessors for SBSES total score and NRS10 showed an intra-class correlation (ICC) of 0.78 and 0.68 for NPWT and 0.70 and 0.77 for traditional dressing, respectively.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSION

The present randomized trial showed that iNPWT and standard dressings on closed transverse inguinal incisions after EVAR resulted in equal subtle scar formation. Objective scar evaluation with 3D images showed good inter-rater agreement.