Effect of Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy vs Standard Wound Dressing on the Development of Surgical Site Infection after Spinal Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Use of a closed-incisional negative pressure therapy (ci-NPT) dressing is an emerging strategy to reduce surgical site infections (SSIs) in spine surgery that lacks robust data.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of a ci-NPT, as compared with a standard dressing, on the development of SSIs after spine surgery.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study over a 2-yr period. Indications for surgery included degenerative disease, deformity, malignancy, and trauma. Exclusion criteria included anterior and lateral approaches to the spine, intraoperative durotomy, or use of minimally invasive techniques. SSIs up to 60 d following surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 274 patients were included. SSI rate was significantly lower with ci-NPT dressing (n = 118) as compared with the standard dressing (n = 156) (3.4 vs 10.9%, P = .02). There was no statistical difference in infection rate for decompression alone procedures (4.2 vs 9.1%, P = .63), but there was a statistically significant reduction with the use of a negative-pressure dressing in cases that required instrumentation (3.2 vs 11.4%, P = .03). Patients at higher risk (instrumentation, deformity, and malignancy) had less SSIs with the use of ci-NPT, although this did not reach statistical significance. There were no complications in either group.

CONCLUSION

SSI rates were significantly reduced with a ci-NPT dressing vs a standard dressing in patients who underwent spinal surgery. The higher cost of a ci-NPT dressing might be justified with instrumented cases, as well as with certain high-risk patient populations undergoing spine surgery, given the serious consequences of an infection.

Closed incision negative pressure therapy: international multidisciplinary consensus recommendations

Surgical site occurrences (SSOs) affect up to or over 25% of patients undergoing operative procedures, with the subset of surgical site infections (SSIs) being the most common. Commercially available closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) may offer surgeons an additional option to manage clean, closed surgical incisions. We conducted an extensive literature search for studies describing ciNPT use and assembled a diverse panel of experts to create consensus recommendations for when using ciNPT may be appropriate. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using key words ‘prevention’, ‘negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT)’, ‘active incisional management’, ‘incisional vacuum therapy’, ‘incisional NPWT’, ‘incisional wound VAC’, ‘closed incisional NPWT’, ‘wound infection’, and ‘SSIs’ identified peer‐reviewed studies published from 2000 to 2015. During a multidisciplinary consensus meeting, the 12 experts reviewed the literature, presented their own ciNPT experiences, identified risk factors for SSOs and developed comprehensive consensus recommendations. A total of 100 publications satisfied the search requirements for ciNPT use. A majority presented data supporting ciNPT use. Numerous publications reported SSI risk factors, with the most common including obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m²); diabetes mellitus; tobacco use; or prolonged surgical time. We recommend that the surgeon assess the individual patient's risk factors and surgical risks. Surgeons should consider using ciNPT for patients at high risk for developing SSOs or who are undergoing a high‐risk procedure or a procedure that would have highly morbid consequences if an SSI occurred.

Systematic review and evidence based recommendations for the use of negative pressure wound therapy in the open abdomen

INTRODUCTION

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) is widely used in the management of the open abdomen despite uncertainty regarding several aspects of usage. An expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations describing the use of NPWT in the open abdomen.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out to investigate the efficacy of a range of Temporary Abdominal Closure methods including variants of NPWT. Evidence-based recommendations were developed by an International Expert Panel and graded according to the quality of supporting evidence.

RESULTS

Pooled results, in non-septic patients showed a 72% fascial closure rate following use of commercial NPWT kits in the open abdomen. This increased to 82% by the addition of a 'dynamic' closure method. Slightly lower rates were showed with use of Wittmann Patch (68%) and home-made NPWT (vac-pack) (58%). Patients with septic complications achieved a lower rate of fascial closure than non-septic patients but NPWT with dynamic closure remained the best option to achieve fascial closure. Mortality rates were consistent and seemed to be related to the underlying medical condition rather than being influenced by the choice of dressing, Treatment goals for open abdomen were defined prior to developing eleven specific evidence-based recommendations suitable for different stages and grades of open abdomen.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The most efficient temporary abdominal closure techniques are NPWT kits with or without a dynamic closure procedure. Evidence-based recommendations will help to tailor its use in a complex treatment pathway for the individual patient.

Negative pressure wound therapy for managementof the surgical incision in orthopaedic surgery: A review of evidence and mechanisms for an emerging indication

Objectives

The period of post-operative treatment before surgical wounds are completely closed remains a key window, during which one can apply new technologies that can minimise complications. One such technology is the use of negative pressure wound therapy to manage and accelerate healing of the closed incisional wound (incisional NPWT).

Methods

We undertook a literature review of this emerging indication to identify evidence within orthopaedic surgery and other surgical disciplines. Literature that supports our current understanding of the mechanisms of action was also reviewed in detail.

Results

A total of 33 publications were identified, including nine clinical study reports from orthopaedic surgery; four from cardiothoracic surgery and 12 from studies in abdominal, plastic and vascular disciplines. Most papers (26 of 33) had been published within the past three years. Thus far two randomised controlled trials – one in orthopaedic and one in cardiothoracic surgery – show evidence of reduced incidence of wound healing complications after between three and five days of post-operative NPWT of two- and four-fold, respectively. Investigations show that reduction in haematoma and seroma, accelerated wound healing and increased clearance of oedema are significant mechanisms of action.

Conclusions

There is a rapidly emerging literature on the effect of NPWT on the closed incision. Initiated and confirmed first with a randomised controlled trial in orthopaedic trauma surgery, studies in abdominal, plastic and vascular surgery with high rates of complications have been reported recently. The evidence from single-use NPWT devices is accumulating. There are no large randomised studies yet in reconstructive joint replacement.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:276–84.