Literature DB >> 30905647

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Versus Closed Suction Irrigation System in the Treatment of Deep Surgical Site Infection After Lumbar Surgery.

Junkai Zeng1, Xiaojiang Sun1, Zhenyu Sun1, Jie Guan1, Chen Han1, Xin Zhao1, Pu Zhang1, Youzhuan Xie2, Jie Zhao1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy of a closed suction irrigation system (CSIS) and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for deep surgical site infection (SSI) after lumbar surgery with instrumentation.
METHODS: We included 31 patients (NPWT group, n =16; CSIS group, n = 15) with deep SSIs after lumbar surgery with instrumentation from 2007 to 2017. The medical records were reviewed and patient characteristics, laboratory results, infection details, and treatment interventions were recorded. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and Oswestry disability index were used to assess pain and functional outcomes preoperatively and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The cost of SSIs were compared between the NPWT and CSIS groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the baseline characteristic data between the NPWT and CSIS groups. Implants were retained in all patients in the CSIS group, but required removal from 2 patients with late infections in the NPWT group. The average hospital stay was 36.8 ± 10.5 days and 33.4 ± 18.9 days in the NPWT and CSIS groups, respectively. The cost was greater in the NPWT group than in the CSIS group. Both NPWT and CSIS significantly reduced the Oswestry disability index and improved the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores, but no significant difference was found between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results have shown that both NPWT and CSIS are efficient techniques for the management of deep SSI after lumbar surgery with instrumentation. CSIS was more economical and the NPWT system was portable and easier for postoperative nursing care.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Closed suction irrigation system; Lumbar; Negative pressure wound therapy; Spine; Surgical site infection

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30905647     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  4 in total

1.  Safety and efficacy of negative pressure wound therapy in treating deep surgical site infection after lumbar surgery.

Authors:  Jingming Wang; Yang Yang; Wenqiang Xing; Hao Xing; Yun Bai; Zhengqi Chang
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-08-06       Impact factor: 3.479

2.  Continuous Negative Pressure Drainage with Intermittent Irrigation Leaded to a Risk Reduction of Perineal Surgical Site Infection Following Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Zhongbo Han; Chunxia Yang; Qingfeng Wang; Meng Wang; Xi Li; Chao Zhang
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 2.423

3.  Negative pressure wound therapy in spinal fusion patients.

Authors:  Asad S Akhter; Benjamin G McGahan; Liesl Close; David Dornbos; Nathaniel Toop; Nicholas R Thomas; Elizabeth Christ; Nader S Dahdaleh; Andrew J Grossbach
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  The use of incisional vacuum-assisted closure system following one-stage incision suture combined with continuous irrigation to treat early deep surgical site infection after posterior lumbar fusion with instrumentation.

Authors:  Hang Shi; Lei Zhu; Zan-Li Jiang; Zhi-Hao Huang; Xiao-Tao Wu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 2.359

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.