Ryan M Naylor1, Hannah E Gilder1, Nikita Gupta2, Thomas C Hydrick2, Joshua R Labott3, David J Mauler2, Taylor P Trentadue4, Brandon Ghislain3, Benjamin D Elder5, Jeremy L Fogelson6. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 2. Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA. 3. Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 4. Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Mayo Clinic Medical Scientist Training Program, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 5. Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 6. Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. Electronic address: fogelson.jeremy@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is used in many surgical specialties to prevent postoperative dehiscence and surgical site infections (SSIs). However, little is known about the role of incisional NPWT in spine fusion surgery. Therefore, we sought to report a single surgeon's experience using incisional NPWT and describe its effects on dehiscence and SSIs after instrumented spine surgery. METHODS: We compared rates of hospital readmission and return to the operating room for dehiscence and SSIs in a consecutive series of patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery with or without NPWT from 2015 to 2018. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients without and 76 patients with NPWT were included for analysis. Half way through the data collection period, all patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion received NPWT. Three of 15 (20.0%) of non-NPWT patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion had dehiscence or SSI compared with zero of 23 (0.0%) of NPWT patients (P = 0.01). NPWT for posterior surgeries was used on a case-by-case basis using risk factors that contribute to SSIs and dehiscence. NPWT patients had higher rates of spinal neoplasia (0.5% vs. 11.3%, P < 0.0001), osteomyelitis/diskitis (1.3% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.02), durotomy (14.9% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.007), revision surgery (32.2% vs. 59.6%, P = 0.0001), and longer fusion constructs (7 vs. 11 levels, P < 0.0001) but had similar rates of dehiscence and SSIs as non-NPWT patients (5.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: NPWT decreases dehiscence and SSIs in patients undergoing lumbar fusion through an anterior approach. When preferentially used in patients at high risk for postoperative wound complications, NPWT prevents increased rates of dehiscence and SSI.
BACKGROUND: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is used in many surgical specialties to prevent postoperative dehiscence and surgical site infections (SSIs). However, little is known about the role of incisional NPWT in spine fusion surgery. Therefore, we sought to report a single surgeon's experience using incisional NPWT and describe its effects on dehiscence and SSIs after instrumented spine surgery. METHODS: We compared rates of hospital readmission and return to the operating room for dehiscence and SSIs in a consecutive series of patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery with or without NPWT from 2015 to 2018. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients without and 76 patients with NPWT were included for analysis. Half way through the data collection period, all patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion received NPWT. Three of 15 (20.0%) of non-NPWT patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion had dehiscence or SSI compared with zero of 23 (0.0%) of NPWT patients (P = 0.01). NPWT for posterior surgeries was used on a case-by-case basis using risk factors that contribute to SSIs and dehiscence. NPWT patients had higher rates of spinal neoplasia (0.5% vs. 11.3%, P < 0.0001), osteomyelitis/diskitis (1.3% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.02), durotomy (14.9% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.007), revision surgery (32.2% vs. 59.6%, P = 0.0001), and longer fusion constructs (7 vs. 11 levels, P < 0.0001) but had similar rates of dehiscence and SSIs as non-NPWT patients (5.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: NPWT decreases dehiscence and SSIs in patients undergoing lumbar fusion through an anterior approach. When preferentially used in patients at high risk for postoperative wound complications, NPWT prevents increased rates of dehiscence and SSI.
Authors: Rabia Qureshi; Varun Puvanesarajah; Amit Jain; Adam L Shimer; Francis H Shen; Hamid Hassanzadeh Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: A A Mehbod; J W Ogilvie; M R Pinto; J D Schwender; E E Transfeldt; K B Wood; J C Le Huec; T Dressel Journal: J Spinal Disord Tech Date: 2005-02