Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy versus conventional dressings following abdominal wall reconstruction: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in surgical techniques have allowed us to achieve primary closure in a high percentage of large abdominal hernia repairs. However, postoperative wound complications remain common. The benefits of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in the management of open abdominal wounds are well described in the literature. Our study investigates the effects of incisional NPWT after primary closure of the abdominal wall.

METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for the period between September 2008 and May 2011 to analyze the outcomes of patients treated postoperatively with incisional NPWT versus conventional dry gauze dressings. Patient information collected included history of abdominal surgeries, smoking status, and body mass index. Postoperative complications were analyzed using χ exact test and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included in this study; of them, 23 were treated with incisional NPWT, whereas 33 received conventional dressings. The rates of overall wound complications in groups I and II were 22% and 63.6%, respectively (P = 0.020). The rates of skin dehiscence were 9% and 39%, respectively (P = 0.014). Both outcomes achieved statistical significance. Rates of infection, skin and fat necrosis, seroma, and hernia recurrence were 4%, 9%, 0%, and 4% for group I and 6%, 18%, 12%, 9% for group II, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that incisional NPWT following abdominal wall reconstruction significantly improves rates of wound complication and skin dehiscence when compared with conventional dressings. Prospective, randomized, controlled studies are needed to further characterize the potential benefits of this therapy on wound healing after abdominal wall reconstruction.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app