Purpose: There is evidence from various surgical specialties that incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) might reduce postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs). In visceral and general surgery, there is varying evidence of its efficacy in reducing surgical site infections. Methods: A prospectively registered patient cohort of 43 patients with abdominal wall and visceral surgery received treatment with iNPWT and was compared to a matched retrospective cohort to analyze its effects on SSI occurrence and respective risk factors. Groups were matched by procedure, sex, body mass index and age. We used two different systems of iNPWT: (i) PREVENATM or (ii) self-made epicutaneous iNPWT from common VAC material. Results: We could not find a total reduction in postoperative SSIs by application of iNPWT. But within the iNPWT cohort, patients with self-made iNPWT suffered more often from SSIs compared to the commercial iNPWT subgroup. No patient specific risk factors could be identified to advocate the use of iNPWT. Conclusion: Our data do not support the use of an incisional negative pressure wound therapy on closed wounds in midline laparotomy incisions. Although, differences exist between the commmercial and self-made systems.
Purpose: There is evidence from various surgical specialties that incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) might reduce postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs). In visceral and general surgery, there is varying evidence of its efficacy in reducing surgical site infections. Methods: A prospectively registered patient cohort of 43 patients with abdominal wall and visceral surgery received treatment with iNPWT and was compared to a matched retrospective cohort to analyze its effects on SSI occurrence and respective risk factors. Groups were matched by procedure, sex, body mass index and age. We used two different systems of iNPWT: (i) PREVENATM or (ii) self-made epicutaneous iNPWT from common VAC material. Results: We could not find a total reduction in postoperative SSIs by application of iNPWT. But within the iNPWT cohort, patients with self-made iNPWT suffered more often from SSIs compared to the commercial iNPWT subgroup. No patient specific risk factors could be identified to advocate the use of iNPWT. Conclusion: Our data do not support the use of an incisional negative pressure wound therapy on closed wounds in midline laparotomy incisions. Although, differences exist between the commmercial and self-made systems.
Entities:
Keywords:
Surgical site infections; iNPWT; negative pressure wound therapy