| Literature DB >> 35207670 |
Kuo-Feng Hsu1,2, Li-Ting Kao3,4, Pei-Yi Chu2, Chun-Yu Chen1,2, Yu-Yu Chou1,2, Dun-Wei Huang1,2, Ting-Hsuan Liu1,2, Sheng-Lin Tsai1,2, Chien-Wei Wu1,2, Chih-Chun Hou1,2, Chih-Hsin Wang1,2, Niann-Tzyy Dai1,2, Shyi-Gen Chen1,2, Yuan-Sheng Tzeng1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to analyze the clinical efficacy of closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy (CiNPWT) when combined with primary closure (PC) in a patient with pressure ulcers, based on one single surgeon's experience at our medical center.Entities:
Keywords: closed-incision negative pressure therapy; closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy; dressing materials; negative pressure wound therapy; pressure ulcer; surgical reconstruction; vacuum-assisted closure; wound control
Year: 2022 PMID: 35207670 PMCID: PMC8875003 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12020182
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pers Med ISSN: 2075-4426
Overall patient characteristics.
| Variable | Total Patients ( | |
|---|---|---|
|
| % | |
| Age (Mean ± SD) | 75.80 ± 14.71 | |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 60 | 46.88 |
| Female | 68 | 53.13 |
| Etiology of bedridden state | ||
| Dementia | 36 | 28.13 |
| Cerebrovascular accident | 30 | 23.44 |
| Parkinson’s disease | 14 | 10.94 |
| Spinal cord injury | 24 | 18.75 |
| Fracture of femur | 13 | 10.16 |
| Other | 11 | 8.59 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Location of defect | ||
| Sacral | 114 | 70.37 |
| Trochanter | 31 | 19.14 |
| Ischial | 7 | 4.32 |
| Back | 5 | 3.09 |
| Other | 5 | 3.09 |
Compares of outcome in overall result.
| Variable | Total Patients ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VY ( | SGAP ( | pALT ( | TFL ( | PC ( | Other ( | PC + CiNPWT ( | ||
| Sex a | 0.7220 | |||||||
| Male | 27 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 16 | |
| Female | 29 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 1 | 14 | |
| Age (Mean ± SD) b | 76.93 ± 12.35 | 74.15 ± 17.86 | 61.17 ± 20.19 | 75.75 ± 14.41 | 78.29 ± 12.37 | 54.50 ± 33.23 | 77.33 ± 15.08 | 0.0715 |
| Case follow-up time (month, Mean ± SD) | 20.40 ± 19.24 | 12.96 ± 14.03 | 13.38 ± 14.81 | 33.88 ± 24.98 | 22.32 ± 17.64 | 24.00 ± 2.83 | 11.4 3± 8.74 | 0.0546 |
| Comorbidity a | ||||||||
| HTN | 33 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 1 | 17 | 0.9218 |
| CHF | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0.5594 |
| VHD | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.4590 |
| CAD | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0.7590 |
| Arrhythmia | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0.9478 |
| Dyslipidemia | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0.5472 |
| PAOD | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.9220 |
| DM | 22 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 13 | 0.8478 |
| CKD | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | >0.999 |
| ESRD HD | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | >0.999 |
| Other | 8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | >0.999 |
| Nil | 10 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 8 | 0.2137 |
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Wound size | 64.24 ± 56.88 | 103.29 ± 36.31 | 92.38 ± 31.01 | 56.00 ± 40.52 | 35.03 ± 23.13 | 67.50 ± 60.10 | 63.47 ± 42.70 | <0.001 |
| Operation time | 78.85 ± 26.82 | 126.00 ± 32.26 | 174.88 ± 45.16 | 121.60 ± 61.13 | 38.33 ± 12.70 | 141.00 ± 124.45 | 38.16 ± 14.02 | <0.001 |
| Debridement time | 2.50 ± 1.83 | 3.79 ± 4.35 | 4.50 ± 2.39 | 2.60 ± 1.51 | 2.40 ± 1.25 | 3.50 ± 2.12 | 2.13 ± 0.98 | 0.0229 |
| Hospital days | 60.92 ± 73.39 | 63.15 ± 61.55 | 61.00 ± 25.60 | 45.80 ± 27.84 | 47.00 ± 26.10 | 58.00 ± 65.05 | 36.78 ± 26.92 | 0.4906 |
| Location of defect | ||||||||
| Sacral | 65 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 24 | |
| Trochanter | 1 | 0 | 6 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 6 | |
| Ischial | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 | |
| Back | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | |
| Other | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | |
n = numbers of patients; nT = numbers of wounds; a Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. b One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). c Debridement time included the debridement before reconstruction and the last debride during reconstruction. Abbreviations: CAD = coronary artery disease, CHF = congestive heart failure, CKD = chronic kidney disease, CVA = cerebral vascular accident, DM = diabetes mellitus, ESRD = end-stage renal disease, HD = hemodialysis, HTN = hypertension, PAOD = peripheral arterial occlusive disease, VHD = valvular heart disease.
Figure 1An 84-year-old woman, bedridden due to cerebral infarction, developed a grade IV sacral pressure ulcer. After the first debridement (a), the wound was directly excised, resulting in a 10 × 13 cm (width × length) defect (b). The wound was reconstructed with primary closure (c) and CiNPWT (Prevena) (d). Reconstruction surgery was performed with the patient in the left lateral decubitus position. From the photo, it can be seen that there is a little tension across the sutured wound. After 7 days, the CiNPWT unit was removed, and the wound had healed well, with no skin maceration over the wound edge (e). The wound had healed without dehiscence or recurrence by 1.5 months after reconstruction (f). Abbreviations: CiNPWT, closed-incision negative wound pressure therapy.
Figure 2A 52-year-old man, bedridden due to a ruptured cerebral aneurysm, gradually developed two communicating pressure ulcers over the bilateral posterior superior iliac spine region. After debridement, we performed a fusiform excision of unviable tissue (a), resulting in a 6 × 17 cm fresh wound (b), and reconstruction was achieved via primary closure and CiNPWT (Prevena) (c,d). The wound was closed only with a superficial fascia suture and subdermal suture, while the epidermal nylon suture was omitted (c). Subsequently, the Prevena system was applied directly. As shown in the image, the edges of the bilateral wounds were well approximated, and no maceration was observed when the Prevena system was removed 7 days postoperatively (e). The wound had healed well by the 2-month follow-up at (f). Abbreviations: CiNPWT, closed-incision negative wound pressure therapy.
Figure 3A 69-year-old woman, bedridden due to underlying hydrocephalus, was admitted to our hospital for a trochanteric pressure ulcer (a). After initial debridement, the wound presented as an 8 × 7 cm grade IV lesion with a depth up to the tensor fascia lata (b). We excised the unviable tissue and performed primary wound closure (c), subsequently covering it with the CiNPWT unit (VAC). The light-gray dressing material between the wound and polyethylene foam was Aquacel Ag+ extra hydrofiber dressing (d). Examination of the wound on postoperative day 7 indicated that it was well approximated, without maceration. Additionally, tissue edema was significantly reduced postoperatively when compared with that in photo C (e). At the 1-month follow-up, the wound had healed well, with no dehiscence or pressure ulcer recurrence (f). Abbreviations: CiNPWT, closed-incision negative wound pressure therapy; VAC, vacuum-assisted closure.
Figure 4A 95-year-old woman, bedridden due to senile dementia, was admitted for pressure ulcers over the bilateral trochanter and sacral region (a: sacral and left trochanter, c: right trochanter). The pressure ulcer over the left trochanteric region was reconstructed using a pALT flap (b), while those over the sacral and right trochanteric regions were reconstructed via fusiform excision and PC + CiNPWT (VAC) (c–f). All three wounds healed well (g–i). The wound in the right trochanteric region (e) was closed under tension when compared with that in the left (b). However, eventually the edematous soft tissue subsided, and tissue tension decreased due to the dermatotraction effect of CiNPWT (e,i). Obviously, as the PC + CiNPWT flap procedure was less difficult, the wound length was significantly shorter than in the pALT flap procedure. Abbreviations: CiNPWT, closed-incision negative wound pressure therapy; PC, primary closure; VAC, vacuum-assisted closure; pALT, pedicle anterolateral thigh flap.
Compares of outcome between Traditional and PC + CiNPWT groups.
| Variable | Total Patients ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional Reconstruction ( | PC + CiNPWT ( | ||||
|
| % |
| % | ||
| Sex a | 0.4179 | ||||
| Male | 44 | 44.9 | 16 | 53.33 | |
| Female | 54 | 55.1 | 14 | 46.67 | |
| Age (Mean ± SD) b | 75.33 ± 14.65 | 77.33 ± 15.08 | 0.5155 | ||
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Wound size (cm2, Mean ± SD) b | 62.85 ± 49.94 | 63.47 ± 42.70 | 0.9490 | ||
| Operation time (min, Mean ± SD) b | 84.73 ± 48.55 | 38.16 ± 14.02 | <0.001 | ||
| Debridement time (Mean ± SD) b | 2.76 ± 2.20 | 2.13 ± 0.98 | 0.0153 | ||
| Hospital days (Mean ± SD) b | 56.70 ± 58.43 | 36.78 ± 26.92 | 0.0054 | ||
| Outcome a | |||||
| Healed | 98 | 75.38 | 26 | 81.25 | 0.4830 |
| Minor | 28 | 21.54 | 6 | 18.75 | 0.7286 |
| Major | 5 | 3.85 | 0 | 0 | 0.2598 |
| Mortality | 13 | 10.00 | 2 | 6.25 | 0.7374 |
| Location of defect a | 0.9641 | ||||
| Sacral | 90 | 69.23 | 24 | 75 | |
| Trochanter | 25 | 19.23 | 6 | 18.75 | |
| Ischial | 6 | 4.62 | 1 | 3.13 | |
| Back | 4 | 3.08 | 1 | 3.13 | |
| Other | 5 | 3.85 | 0 | 0 | |
a Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. b Independent t test.
Compares of outcome between PC and PC + CiNPWT groups.
| Variable | Total Wounds ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC ( | PC + CiNPWT ( | ||||
|
| % |
| % | ||
| Wound size (cm2, Mean ± SD) a | 35.03 ± 23.13 | 63.47 ± 42.70 | 0.0019 | ||
| Operation time (min, Mean ± SD) a | 38.33 ± 12.70 | 38.16 ± 14.02 | 0.9587 | ||
| Debridement time (Mean ± SD) a | 2.40 ± 1.25 | 2.13 ± 0.98 | 0.3360 | ||
| Hospital days (Mean ± SD) a | 47.00 ± 26.10 | 36.78 ± 26.92 | 0.1349 | ||
| Outcome b | |||||
| Healed | 28 | 93.33 | 26 | 81.25 | 0.2577 |
| Minor | 4 | 13.33 | 6 | 18.75 | 0.7331 |
| Major | 1 | 3.33 | 0 | 0 | 0.4839 |
| Mortality | 1 | 3.33 | 2 | 6.25 | 0.5928 |
| Location of defect b | 0.0109 | ||||
| Sacral | 11 | 36.67 | 24 | 75 | |
| Trochanter | 8 | 26.67 | 6 | 18.75 | |
| Ischial | 4 | 13.33 | 1 | 3.13 | |
| Back | 3 | 10 | 1 | 3.13 | |
| Other | 4 | 13.33 | 0 | 0 | |
a Independent t test. b Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test.