Search Results (2)

The results of current studies are not conclusive on the efficacy of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for the prevention of sternal wound infection (SWI) after adult cardiac surgery. A systematic review of the literature was performed through PubMed, Scopus and Google to identify studies which investigated the efficacy of NPWT to prevent SWI after adult cardiac surgery. Available data were pooled using RevMan and Meta-analyst with random effect models. Out of 191 studies retrieved from the literature, ten fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in this analysis. The quality of these studies was judged fair for three of them and poor for seven studies. Only one study was powered to address the efficacy of NPWT for the prevention of postoperative SWI. Pooled analysis of these studies showed that NPWT was associated with lower risk of any SWI (4.5% vs. 9.0%, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34–0.84, I² 48%), superficial SWI (3.8% vs. 4.4%, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.29–1.36, I² 65%), and deep SWI (1.8% vs. 4.7%, RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26–0.74, I² 0%), but such a difference was not statistically significant for superficial SWI. When only randomized and alternating allocated studies were included, NPWT was associated with a significantly lower risk of any SWI (3.3% vs. 16.5%, RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08–0.62, I² 0%), superficial SWI (2.6% vs. 12.4%, RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06–0.69, I² 0%), and deep SWI (1.2% vs. 4.8%, RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03–0.95, I² 0%). This pooled analysis showed that NPWT may prevent postoperative SWI after adult cardiac surgery. NPWT is expected to be particularly useful in patients at risk for surgical site infection and may significantly reduce the burden of resources needed to treat such a complication. However, the methodology of the available studies was judged as poor for most of them. Further studies are needed to obtain conclusive results on the potential benefits of this preventative strategy. Full article

Background: Closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) may reduce the rate of wound complications and promote healing of the incisional site. We report our experience with this dressing in breast reconstruction patients with abdominal free flap donor sites. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients who underwent breast reconstruction using abdominal free flaps (DIEP, MS-TRAM) at a single institution (Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria) between 2016 and 2021. Results: 126 female patients (mean age: 50 ± 10 years) were analysed, with 41 and 85 patients in the ciNPT (Prevena) and non-ciNPT (Comfeel) groups, respectively. There were reduced wound complications in almost all outcomes measured in the ciNPT group compared with the non-ciNPT group; however, none reached statistical significance. The ciNPT group demonstrated a lower prevalence of surgical site infections (9.8% vs. 11.8%), wound dehiscence (4.9% vs. 12.9%), wound necrosis (0% vs. 2.4%), and major complication requiring readmission (2.4% vs. 7.1%). Conclusion: The use of ciNPT for abdominal donor sites in breast reconstruction patients with risk factors for poor wound healing may reduce wound complications compared with standard adhesive dressings; however, large scale, randomised controlled trials are needed to confirm these observations. Investigation of the impact of ciNPT patients in comparison with conventional dressings, in cohorts with equivocal risk profiles, remains a focus for future research. Full article