Amended Classification of the Open Abdomen

A method for treatment of deep and superficial enteroatmospheric fistulas in an open abdomen, ChimneyVAC: Ten years experience

BACKGROUND

Leakage of intestinal fluid is a challenging event when it appears in an open abdomen (OA) and surgical deviation does not seem possible. Intestinal contents in the abdominal cavity maintain inflammation and drainage is there for essential. We have developed a method, ChimneyVAC, to treat both deep and superficial enteroatmospheric fistulas (EAF) AIMS: To describe this innovative surgical technique and our 10-year experience.

MATERIAL & METHODS

This single-center observational cohort study included all 16 consecutive patients treated with ChimneyVAC. Seven women and 9 men; median age: 47; (interquartile range [IQR]:39-63) years, 15 with a small bowel fistula and 1 with a large bowel fistula. All except of the colonic fistula were classified as a high output fistula; 14 were deep and 2 superficial. In this technique, a negative-pressure source is applied directly above the fistula opening, in addition to negative pressure wound therapy for the OA. This controls the leakage of intestinal fluid by direct drainage into a vacuum system, thereby avoiding contamination of the abdomen. A controlled enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) then forms as the traction from the ChimneyVAC brings the fistula opening to skin level.

RESULTS

In 14 patients, an ECF formed after a median of 42 (IQR:28-55) days and 12 (IQR:7-16) dressing changes. The median length of hospitalization was 103 (IQR:58-143) days. Two patients died of multiorgan failure and 14 initially survived.

DISCUSSION

This study showed that 14 out of 16 patients survived the initial treatment for enteric leakage with the ChimneyVAC method. The outcome of ChimneyVAC treatment is a controlled ECF, which was then corrected after a median of six months. However, hospitalization is lengthy, the patients undergo several dressing changes and many needs additional parenteral nutrition until intestinal continuity is reestablished.

CONCLUSION

ChimneyVAC is a feasible method for treatment of EAF in an OA, with favorable survival.

Entero-Cutaneous and Entero-Atmospheric Fistulas: Insights into Management Using Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Enteric fistulas are a common problem in gastrointestinal tract surgery and remain associated with significant mortality rates, due to complications such as sepsis, malnutrition, and electrolyte imbalance. The increasingly widespread use of open abdomen techniques for the initial treatment of abdominal sepsis and trauma has led to the observation of so-called entero-atmospheric fistulas. Because of their clinical complexity, the proper management of enteric fistula requires a multidisciplinary team. The main goal of the treatment is the closure of enteric fistula, but also mortality reduction and improvement of patients' quality of life are fundamental. Successful management of patients with enteric fistula requires the establishment of controlled drainage, management of sepsis, prevention of fluid and electrolyte depletion, protection of the skin, and provision of adequate nutrition. Many of these fistulas will heal spontaneously within 4 to 6 weeks of conservative management. If closure is not accomplished after this time point, surgery is indicated. Despite advances in perioperative care and nutritional support, the mortality remains in the range of 15 to 30%. In more recent years, the use of negative pressure wound therapy for the resolution of enteric fistulas improved the outcomes, so patients can be successfully treated with a non-operative approach. In this review, our intent is to highlight the most important aspects of negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of patients with enterocutaneous or entero-atmospheric fistulas.

The open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery: comprehensive, expert, narrative review

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen is an innovation that greatly improved surgical understanding of damage control, temporary abdominal closure, staged abdominal reconstruction, viscera and enteric fistula care, and abdominal wall reconstruction. This article provides an evidence-informed, expert, comprehensive narrative review of the open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery.

METHODS

A group of 12 international trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery experts were invited to review current literature and important concepts surrounding the open abdomen.

RESULTS

The open abdomen may be classified using validated systems developed by a working group in 2009 and modified by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-The Abdominal Compartment Society in 2013. It may be indicated in major trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, vascular surgical emergencies, and severe acute pancreatitis; to facilitate second look laparotomy or avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome; and when the abdominal wall cannot be safely closed. Temporary abdominal closure and staged abdominal reconstruction methods include a mesh/sheet, transabdominal wall dynamic fascial traction, negative pressure wound therapy, and hybrid negative pressure wound therapy and dynamic fascial traction. This last method likely has the highest primary fascial closure rates. Direct peritoneal resuscitation is currently an experimental strategy developed to improve primary fascial closure rates and reduce complications in those with an open abdomen. Primary fascial closure rates may be improved by early return to the operating room; limiting use of crystalloid fluids during the surgical interval; and preventing and/or treating intra-abdominal hypertension, enteric fistulae, and intra-abdominal collections after surgery. The majority of failures of primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula formation may be prevented using effective temporary abdominal closure techniques, providing appropriate resuscitation fluids and nutritional support, and closing the abdomen as early as possible.

CONCLUSION

Subsequent stages of the innovation of the open abdomen will likely involve the design and conduct of prospective studies to evaluate appropriate indications for its use and effectiveness and safety of the above components of open abdomen management.

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial

BACKGROUND

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

METHODS

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

DISCUSSION

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

A prospective multicentre study evaluating the outcomes of the abdominal wall dehiscence repair using posterior component separation with transversus abdominis muscle release reinforced by a retro-muscular mesh: filling a step

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the results of posterior component separation (CS) and transversus abdominis muscle release (TAR) with retro-muscular mesh reinforcement in patients with primary abdominal wall dehiscence (AWD). The secondary aims were to detect the incidence of postoperative surgical site occurrence and risk factors of incisional hernia (IH) development following AWD repair with posterior CS with TAR reinforced by retromuscular mesh.

METHODS

Between June 2014 and April 2018, 202 patients with grade IA primary AWD (Björck's first classification) following midline laparotomies were treated using posterior CS with TAR release reinforced by a retro-muscular mesh in a prospective multicenter cohort study.

RESULTS

The mean age was 42 ± 10 years, with female predominance (59.9%). The mean time from index surgery (midline laparotomy) to primary AWD was 7 ± 3 days. The mean vertical length of primary AWD was 16 ± 2 cm. The median time from primary AWD occurrence to posterior CS + TAR surgery was 3 ± 1 days. The mean operative time of posterior CS + TAR was 95 ± 12 min. No recurrent AWD occurred. Surgical site infections (SSI), seroma, hematoma, IH, and infected mesh occurred in 7.9%, 12.4%, 2%, 8.9%, and 3%, respectively. Mortality was reported in 2.5%. Old age, male gender, smoking, albumin level < 3.5 gm%, time from AWD to posterior CS + TAR surgery, SSI, ileus, and infected mesh were significantly higher in IH. IH rate was 0.5% and 8.9% at two and three years, respectively. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, the predictors of IH were time from AWD till posterior CS + TAR surgical intervention, ileus, SSI, and infected mesh.

CONCLUSION

Posterior CS with TAR reinforced by retro-muscular mesh insertion resulted in no AWD recurrence, low IH rates, and low mortality of 2.5%. Trial registration Clinical trial: NCT05278117.

Intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) has been acknowledged as an important contributor to organ dysfunction in critically ill patients, both in surgical and medical conditions. As our understanding of the pathophysiology evolves, risk factors are better recognized, preventive measures can now be implemented and therapeutic interventions tailored to the physiology of the patient. In the current review, we want to highlight developing insights in the epidemiology and treatment of patients with IAH and ACS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The impact of IAH and ACS on kidney function and other outcomes continues to draw attention in recent studies. New methods for IAP measurement are under development, and the search for biomarkers to detect IAH or ACS continues. In conditions wherein IAH and ACS are common, recent studies allow better prevention and treatment of these conditions, based on the contemporary ICU management consisting of IAP measurement, judicious fluid resuscitation and decompressive laparotomy where necessary. Surgical treatment options including open abdomen therapy continue to be improved with demonstrable impact on outcomes.

SUMMARY

In this manuscript, we provide an overview of recent insights and developments in the epidemiology, monitoring and treatment of patients with IAH and/or ACS.

Retrospective Study of Indications and Outcomes of Open Abdomen with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Technique for Abdominal Sepsis in a Tertiary Referral Centre

In patients with advanced sepsis from abdominal disease, the open abdomen (OA) technique as part of a damage control surgery (DCS) approach enables relook surgery to control infection, defer intestinal anastomosis, and prevent intra-abdominal hypertension. Limited evidence is available on key outcomes, such as mortality and rate of definitive fascial closure (DFC), which are needed for surgeons to select patients and adequate therapeutic strategies. Abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has shown rates of DFC around 90%. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate in-hospital survival and factors associated with mortality in acute, non-trauma patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT for sepsis from abdominal disease. Fifty consecutive patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT between February 2015 and July 2022 were included. Overall mortality was 32%. Among surviving patients, 97.7% of cases reached DFC, and the overall complication rate was 58.8%, with one case of entero-atmospheric fistula. At univariable analysis, age (p = 0.009), ASA IV status (<0.001), Mannheim Peritonitis Index > 30 (p = 0.001) and APACHE II score (p < 0.001) were associated with increased mortality. At multivariable analysis, higher APACHE II was a predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.136, 95% CI 1.08−4.22; p = 0.029). Although very resource-intensive, DCS and the OA technique are valuable tools to manage patients with advanced abdominal sepsis, allowing reduced mortality and high DFC rates.

Vacuum-assisted closure versus on-demand relaparotomy in patients with secondary peritonitis-the VACOR trial: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Secondary peritonitis is a severe condition with a 20–32% reported mortality. The accepted treatment modalities are vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) or primary closure with relaparotomy on-demand (ROD). However, no randomised controlled trial has been completed to compare the two methods potential benefits and disadvantages.

Methods

This study will be a randomised controlled multicentre trial, including patients aged 18 years or older with purulent or faecal peritonitis confined to at least two of the four abdominal quadrants originating from the small intestine, colon, or rectum. Randomisation will be web-based to either primary closure with ROD or VAC in blocks of 2, 4, and 6. The primary endpoint is peritonitis-related complications within 30 or 90 days and one year after index operation. Secondary outcomes are comprehensive complication index (CCI) and mortality after 30 or 90 days and one year; quality of life assessment by (SF-36) after three and 12 months, the development of incisional hernia after 12 months assessed by clinical examination and CT-scanning and healthcare resource utilisation. With an estimated superiority of 15% in the primary outcome for VAC, 340 patients must be included. Hospitals in Denmark and Europe will be invited to participate.

Discussion

There is no robust evidence for choosing either open abdomen with VAC treatment or primary closure with relaparotomy on-demand in patients with secondary peritonitis. The present study has the potential to answer this important clinical question.

Trial Registration

The study protocol has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03932461). Protocol version 1.0, 9 January 2022.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-022-00427-x.

The Significance of Visceral Protection in Preventing Enteroatmospheric Fistulae During Open Abdomen Treatment in Patients With Secondary Peritonitis: A Propensity Score-matched Case-control Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of a visceral protective layer (VPL) on the formation of enteroatmospheric fistulae (EAF) in open abdomen treatment (OAT) for peritonitis.

BACKGROUND

EAF formation is a severe complication of OAT. Despite the widespread use of OAT, there are no robust evidence-based recommendations for preventing EAF.

METHODS

A total of 120 peritonitis patients with secondary peritonitis as a result of a perforation of a hollow viscus or anastomotic insufficiency who had undergone OAT were included, and 14 clinical parameters were recorded in prospective OAT databases at 2 tertiary referral centers. For this analysis, patients with a VPL were assigned to the treatment group and those without a VPL to the control group. Propensity Score (PS) matching was performed. Known risk factors in OAT such as malignant disease, mortality, emergency operation, OAT duration, and fascial closure were matching variables. The influence of VPL on EAF formation was statistically evaluated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

With 34 patients in each group, no notable differences were identified with regard to age, sex, underlying disease, mortality, emergency operation, fascial closure, and OAT duration. Overall, a mortality rate of 22.1% for OAT due to peritonitis was observed. Mean OAT duration was approximately 9 days, and secondary fascial closure was achieved in more than two-thirds of all patients. Fascial traction was used in more than 75% of cases. EAF formation was significantly more frequent in the control group (EAF formation: VPL group 2.9% vs control 26.5%; P = 0.00). In the final regression analysis, the use of VPL resulted in a significant reduction in the risk of EAF formation (odds ratio 0.08; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.71, P = 0.02), which translates to a relative risk reduction of 89.1%.

CONCLUSION

VPL effectively prevents EAF formation during OAT in patients with peritonitis. We recommend the consistent use of VPL as part of a standardized OAT treatment algorithm.

Predictive factors of mortality in open abdomen for abdominal sepsis: a retrospective cohort study on 113 patients

Over the past few years, the open abdomen (OA) as a part of Damage Control Surgery (DCS) has been introduced as a surgical strategy with the intent to reduce the mortality of patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Aims of our study were to analyze the OA effects on patients with abdominal sepsis and identify predictive factors of mortality. Patients admitted to our institution with abdominal sepsis requiring OA from 2010 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were mortality, morbidity and definitive fascial closure (DFC). Comparison between groups was made via univariate and multivariate analyses. On 1474 patients operated for abdominal sepsis, 113 (7.6%) underwent OA. Male gender accounted for 52.2% of cases. Mean age was 68.1 ± 14.3 years. ASA score was > 2 in 87.9%. Mean BMI, APACHE II score and Mannheim Peritonitis Index were 26.4 ± 4.9, 15.3 ± 6.3, and 22.6 ± 7.3, respectively. A negative pressure wound system technique was used in 47% of the cases. Overall, mortality was 43.4%, morbidity 76.6%, and DFC rate was 97.8%. Entero-atmospheric fistula rate was 2.2%. At multivariate analysis, APACHE II score (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05–1.32; p = 0.005), Frailty Clinical Scale (OR 4.66; 95% CI 3.19–6.12; p < 0.0001) and ASA grade IV (OR 7.86; 95% CI 2.18–28.27; p = 0.002) were significantly associated with mortality. OA seems to be a safe and reliable treatment for critically ill patients with severe abdominal sepsis. Nonetheless, in these patients, co-morbidity and organ failure remain the major obstacles to a better prognosis.

Superior primary fascial closure rate and lower mortality after open abdomen using negative pressure wound therapy with continuous fascial traction

BACKGROUND

Open abdomen (OA) is a useful option for treatment strategy in many acute abdominal catastrophes. A number of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) methods are used with limited number of comparative studies. The present study was done to examine risk factors for failed delayed primary fascial closure (DPFC) and risk factors for mortality in patients treated with OA.

METHODS

This study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of the hospital records of all consecutive patients treated with OA during the years 2009 to 2016 at five tertiary referral hospitals and three secondary referral centers in Finland.

RESULTS

Six hundred seventy-six patients treated with OA were included in the study. Vacuum-assisted closure with continuous mesh-mediated fascial traction (VACM) was the most popular TAC method used (N = 398, 59%) followed by VAC (N = 128, 19%), Bogota bag (N = 128, 19%), and self-designed methods (N = 22, 3%). In multivariate analysis, enteroatmospheric fistula and the number of needed TAC changes increased the risk for failed DPFC (odds ratio [OR], 8.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2-12.8; p < 0.001 and OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; p < 0.001, respectively). Instead, VACM and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm as cause for OA both decreased the risk for failed DPFC (OR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.3; p < 0.001 and OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; p = 0.012). The overall mortality rate was 30%. In multivariate analysis for mortality, multiorgan dysfunction (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.6-3.6; p < 0.001), and increasing age (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.0-9.7; p < 0.001) predicted increased mortality. Institutional large annual patient volume (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.6; p < 0.001) and ileus and postoperative peritonitis in comparison to severe acute pancreatitis associated with decreased mortality (OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.4; p < 0.001; OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8; p = 0.009). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed increased survival in patients treated with VACM in comparison with other TAC methods (LogRank p = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

We report superior role for VACM methodology in terms of successful primary fascial closure and increased survival in patients with OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

[Laparostoma-Avoidance and treatment of complications]

The open abdomen (OA) is an established concept for treating severe abdominal diseases. The most frequent reasons for placement of an open abdomen are abdominal sepsis (e.g. from intestinal perforation or anastomotic leakage), severe abdominal organ injury and abdominal compartment syndrome. The pathophysiology is much more complex than the surgeon's eye can see in an OA. The temporary closure of the abdominal wall ensures sufficient drainage of infected ascites, protection of the intestinal loops and conditioning of the abdominal wall in order to be able carry out definitive closure of the abdominal wall at the end of the surgical treatment. Negative peritoneal pressure therapy combined with fascia traction (with or without mesh) is well-established in the management of an open abdomen.

Early Initiation of a Standardized Open Abdomen Treatment With Vacuum Assisted Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction Achieves Best Results

Background: The open abdomen (OA) is an important approach for managing intra-abdominal catastrophes and continues to be the standard of care. Complete fascial closure is an essential treatment objective and can be achieved by the use of different dynamic closure techniques. Both surgical technique and-decision making are essential for optimal patient outcome in terms of fascial closure. The aim of this study was to analyse patients' outcome after the use of mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) associated with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and identify important factors that negatively influenced final fascial closure. Methods: A single center ambispective analysis was performed including all patients treated for an open abdomen in a tertiary referral center from 3/2011 till 2/2020. All patients with a minimum survival >24 h after initiation of treatment were analyzed. The data concerning patient management was collected and entered into the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society (EHS). Patient basic characteristics considering OA indication, primary fascial closure, as well as important features in surgical technique including time after index procedure to start mesh mediated fascial traction, surgical closure techniques and patients' long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Data were obtained from 152 patients who underwent open abdomen therapy (OAT) in a single center study. Indications for OAT as per-protocol analysis were sepsis (33.3%), abdominal compartment syndrome (31.6%), followed by peritonitis (24.2%), abdominal trauma (8.3%) and burst abdomen (2.4%). Overall fascial closure rate was 80% as in the per-protocol analysis. When patients that started OA management with MMFT and NPWT from the initial surgery a significantly better fascial closure rate was achieved compared to patients that started 3 or more days later (p < 0.001). An incisional hernia developed in 35.8% of patients alive with a median follow-up of 49 months (range 6-96 months). Conclusion: Our main findings emphasize the importance of a standardized treatment plan, initiated early on during management of the OA. The use of vacuum assisted closure in combination with MMFT showed high rates of fascial closure. Absence of initial intraperitoneal NPWT as well as delayed start of MMFT were risk factors for non-fascial closure. Initiation of OA with VACM should not be unnecessary delayed.

Effect of Negative Pressure Therapy on Open Abdomen Treatments. Prospective Randomized Study With Two Commercial Negative Pressure Systems

Introduction: The use of negative pressure dressings for open abdominal therapy has made a great impact on strategies for open abdominal treatment. Observed intestinal damage and developement of fistula formation raises questions about safety of commonly used systems (AB-Thera). The most common used system uses foils for shielding intestines directly from negative pressure. As an alternative a system with open pore dressing in double layer film was introduced (Suprasorb CNP) and proved to safe in animal studies. We compared the effects of this two systems on patients requiring open abdominal treatment. Materials and methods: Patients with secondary peritonitis in at least two abdominal quadrants were included in this randomized study. Inclusion criteria were secondary peritonitis (ACS), abdominal compartment syndrome, and abdominal trauma combined with ACS and/or contaminated abdomen. Patients with active bleeding and pancreatitis were not included. We examined Mannheim peritonitis Index (MPI), bloodcount, PCT, amount of fluid collected, and morphological changes on the bowel. Data were collected on day 2, 4, 7, 14, 21, and 28. Primary end point was fascial closure. Examination was terminated in case of death and damage to the abdominal organs. Groups were compared using Mann Whitney U-test and chi square test. Trend evaluation was evaluated using an one way repeated measure analysis of variance. P-values below 0.05 was considered significat. Results: Thirty four patients were included between August 2010 and September 2012. There were no significant difference between two groups in MPI, age, and gender. Mean duration of treatment, WBC, CRP, and abdominal closure rate were not significantly different between groups. Suprasorb CNP System collected twice more fluid than AB-Thera and decreased PCT on significantly faster rate than AB-Thera. Four patients died (11%) and four patients developed enteric fistula (11%). Closure rate was achieved in 27 out of 34 Patients (79.5%). Closure rate was not significantly different between groups. Conclusion: The use of both systems proved to be efficient and safe. The application of well-dosed, moderate negative pressure on contaminated areas of the abdomen seems to have a lot of potential and it is worth directing greater research potential in this direction.

Factors influencing the fascial closure rate after open abdomen treatment: Results from the European Hernia Society (EuraHS) Registry : Surgical technique matters

Purpose

Definitive fascial closure is an essential treatment objective after open abdomen treatment and mitigates morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of evidence on factors that promote or prevent definitive fascial closure.

Methods

A multi-center multivariable analysis of data from the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society included all cases between 1 May 2015 and 31 December 2019. Different treatment elements, i.e. the use of a visceral protective layer, negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, as well as patient characteristics were included in the multivariable analysis. The study was registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRK00021719).

Results

Data were included from 630 patients from eleven surgical departments in six European countries. Indications for OAT were peritonitis (46%), abdominal compartment syndrome (20.5%), burst abdomen (11.3%), abdominal trauma (9%), and other conditions (13.2%). The overall definitive fascial closure rate was 57.5% in the intention-to-treat analysis and 71% in the per-protocol analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a positive correlation of negative-pressure wound therapy (odds ratio: 2.496, p < 0.001) and dynamic closure techniques (odds ratio: 2.687, p < 0.001) with fascial closure and a negative correlation of intra-abdominal contamination (odds ratio: 0.630, p = 0.029) and the number of surgical procedures before OAT (odds ratio: 0.740, p = 0.005) with DFC.

Conclusion

The clinical course and prognosis of open abdomen treatment can significantly be improved by the use of treatment elements such as negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, which are associated with definitive fascial closure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-020-02336-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevention of Fascial Retraction in the Open Abdomen with a Novel Device

The open abdomen requires intensive and specific treatment efforts. Long hospital admissions, treatment duration, high mortality rates, deferred and delayed wound closures with alloplastic materials or elaborate closure techniques, and the need for subsequent surgical procedures justify and call for implementation of new therapy options. The case presented here demonstrates the use of a new product (Fasciotens Abdomen) to prevent fascial retraction in the open abdomen of an extubated, conscious patient with four-quadrant peritonitis after perforated appendicitis. Controlled, anteriorly directed fascial traction of 50-60 Newtons prevented fascial retraction during open treatment of the abdomen. Once edema was reduced, abdominal closure was completed without difficulty. This new form of therapy was well tolerated by the patient and led to a markedly more rapid abdominal closure without mesh or abdominal wall reconstruction.

Cost evaluation of temporary abdominal closure methods in abdominal sepsis patients successfully treated with an open abdomen. Should we take temporary abdominal closure methods at face value? Health economic evaluation

Background

Many commercial and artisanal devices are utilized for temporary abdominal closure in patients being managed with an open abdomen for abdominal sepsis. The costs of materials required to treat patients with an open abdomen varies drastically. In Costa Rica, due to the lack of accurate information relating to the actual cost to manage a patient entails that the method with the least expensive materials is usually selected.

Study design

A single-center retrospective review of 46 patients diagnosed with abdominal sepsis and successfully treated with an open abdomen and one of the three temporary abdominal closure methods during the year 2018 in a tertiary hospital was evaluated using a gross-cost pricing model developed by the authors. The three temporary abdominal closure methods were a locally manufactured Bogota Bag, and commercial abdominal negative pressure therapy dressing and negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation. The per-unit-costs were hospital day and intensive care day, number of surgical procedures per patient, cost negative pressure therapy kits.

Results

Statistically significant cost reduction was observed in the cohort treated with negative pressure therapy with instillation as compared to the other temporary abdominal closure methods. The reduction of hospital length of stay, as well as fewer number of surgeries were the main contributing factors in diminishing costs. On average, the costs to treat a patient utilizing negative pressure therapy with instillation was nearly 50% lower than using the other two temporary abdominal closure methods.

Conclusions

The costs relating to managing abdominal sepsis in the septic open abdomen vary greatly according to the temporary abdominal closure utilized. If the hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay and number of surgeries required are the main parameters used in determining costs, the use of negative pressure therapy with 0.9% saline solution instillation reduces costs by nearly 50% in comparison to conventional negative pressure wound therapy and Bogota Bag. In this instance, the more expensive method at first glance, obtained a considerable cost reduction when compared to therapies that utilize less expensive materials.

•

The costs of materials required to treat patients with an OA varies drastically. In Costa Rica, due to the lack of accurate information relating to the actual cost to manage a patient entails that the method with the least expensive materials is usually selected.

•

Statistically significant cost reduction was observed in the cohort treated with negative pressure therapy with instillation as compared to the other TAC methods.

•

On average, the costs to treat a patient utilizing negative pressure therapy with instillation was up to 50% lower than using the other two TAC methods.

Dynamic closure techniques for treatment of an open abdomen: an update

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen (OA) is an important approach for managing intra-abdominal catastrophes and continues to be the standard of care. Despite this, challenges remain as it is associated with a high incidence of complications and poor outcomes. The objective is to perform a systematic review on dynamic closure techniques for fascial closure during open abdomen management.

METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted involving 4 different databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE (WOS) and EMBASE). All studies that described dynamic closure techniques in OA patients were eligible for inclusion. Data collected were synthesized by each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the final synthesis. Overall methodological quality was low with a high number of retrospective observational studies and low number of patients. All included studies are observational cohort studies. No studies reported on the use of either Wittmann patch, dynamic retention sutures or ABRA system. Two studies reported on the ABRA system in combination with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT), while 9 reported on mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) combined with NPWT. Other types of fascial traction, either by dynamic suture lines or by a self-made silastic tube system, and NPWT were reported in 2 studies. Overall closure rates are 93.2% for the ABRA system + NPWT versus 72.0% for the mesh-mediated fascial traction + NPWT.

CONCLUSION

Careful selection and good management of OA patients will avoid prolonged treatment and facilitate early fascial closure. Future research should focus on comparison of different temporary dynamic closure techniques to evolve toward best treatment options, in terms of both fascial closure rates and long-term incisional hernia rates.

Open Abdomen in a Critically Ill Patient

One of the damage control strategies used to avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome is “open abdomen (OA),” where the facial edges and the skin is left open, exposing the abdominal viscera. Although it reduces the mortality both in trauma and non-trauma abdominal complications, it does create a significant challenge in an intensive care setting, as it has physiological consequences that need early recognition and prompt treatment both in the intensive care unit and in the operating room. The article aims to review literature on “open abdomen,” describe the challenges in such cases, and proposes a guideline for the intensivist in managing a patient with an OA.

How to cite this article: Mitra LG, Saluja V, Dhingra U. Open Abdomen in a Critically Ill Patient. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 4):S193–S200.

Application of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy with Instillation and Dwell Time of the Open Abdomen: Initial Experience

Recent therapeutic advances in the management of severe abdominal sepsis (SAS) have improved patient mortality and morbidity. However, SAS and its impact on multiple organ failure remain a serious, life-threatening condition with a high mortality rate. The open abdomen (OA) technique has become an effective alternative to repeat laparotomy. The use of OA negative pressure wound therapy (OA NPWT) has been a significant advancement in the management of the open abdomen. Similarly, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with instillation and dwell time (NPWT-i) has been used in patients with multiple comorbidities, with an American Society of Anesthesiology Classification ≥ 2, severe traumatic wounds, diabetic foot infections, and wounds complicated by invasive infection or extensive biofilm. Controlled instillation of saline during NPWT-i may further enhance healing by facilitating automatic and contained volumetric wound irrigation and cleansing and diluting local levels of inflammatory cytokines, improving the local as well as the systemic response to infection. Although the soft tissue and intra-abdominal compartments differ anatomically, they share very similar biologic responses to infections. Therefore, from a biologic and physiologic aspect, intraperitoneal instillation therapy may play a role as an adjunctive treatment of abdominal compartment inflammation from trauma or infection. The addition of saline solution instillation to OA NPWT (OAI) in a programmed, controlled manner may offer the clinician an effective adjunctive therapy for the treatment of the complex septic abdomen. The technical aspects of instillation into the OA and a pooled multicenter case study cohort utilizing OAI with saline solution, bacitracin, or hypochlorous acid in the management of the septic abdomen is presented.

Damage control surgery for perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis: saves lives and reduces ostomy

Introduction

Over the last decade, damage control surgery (DCS) has been emerging as a feasible alternative for the management of patients with abdominal infection and sepsis. So far, there is no consensus about the role of DCS for acute perforated diverticulitis. In this study, we present the outcome of a multi-institutional series of patients presenting with Hinchey's grade III and IV diverticulitis managed by DCS.

Methods

All the participating centers were tertiary referral hospitals. A total of 34 patients with perforated diverticulitis treated with DCS during the period 2011–2017 were included in the study. During the first laparotomy, a limited resection of the diseased segment was performed followed by lavage and use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). After 24/48 h of resuscitation, patients returned to the operating room for a second look. Mortality, morbidity, and restoration of bowel continuity were the primary outcomes of the study.

Results

There were 15 males (44%) and 19 females (56%) with a mean age of 66.9 years (SD ± 12.7). Mean BMI was 28.42 kg/m² (SD ± 3.33). Thirteen cases (38%) were Wasvary’s modified Hinchey's stage III, and 21 cases (62%) Hinchey's stage IV. Mean Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) was 25.12 (SD ± 6.28). In 22 patients (65%), ASA score was ≥ grade III. Twenty-four patients (71%) had restoration of bowel continuity, while 10 (29%) patients had an end colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure). Three of these patients received a temporary loop ileostomy. One patient had an anastomotic leak. Mortality rate was 12%. Mean length of hospital stay was 21.9 days. At multivariate analysis, male gender (p = 0.010) and MPI (p = 0.034) correlated with a high percentage of Hartmann’s procedures.

Conclusion

DCS is a feasible procedure for patients with generalized peritonitis secondary to perforated diverticulitis, and it appears to be related to a higher rate of bowel reconstruction. Due to the open abdomen, stay in ICU with prolonged mechanical ventilation is required, but these aggressive measures may be needed by most patients undergoing surgery for perforated diverticulitis, whatever the procedure is done.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy with Instillation in the Septic Open Abdomen Utilizing a Modified Negative Pressure Therapy System

BACKGROUND

Various treatment modalities are utilized to treat the open abdomen. The use of negative pressure wound therapy(NPWT)has been a great advancement and has become the preferred modality for temporary abdominal closure technique (TAC). Programmed instillation of the abdominal cavity with saline solution in conjunction with a commercial negative pressure system showed positive results in the management of severe abdominal sepsis in patients that were treated with an open abdomen. Severe abdominal sepsis continues to be an oftendifficult clinical problem for the general surgeon. The use of an open abdomen technique in this setting and the ideal TAC method continue to be debated. The failure to understand the biomechanical features/limitations of negative pressure devices are often contributing factors associated with therapeutic failures reported in the literature.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the underlying principles behind negative pressure wound therapy with instillation in the context of abdominal sepsis, as well as its optimal usage in these conditions.

METHODS

A systematic review and two retrospective cohort studies, both published and unpublished performed by some of the authors were included to provide a basis form comparison between NPWT and NPWT-I outcomes in managing abdominal sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that this technique appears to reduce morbidity, mortality, and hospital and critical care length of stay. This communication is intended to help inform general surgeons that manage complex abdominal infections on how to optimally apply this technique.

Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure with Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction Achieves Better Outcomes than Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure Alone: A Comparative Study

Background

Open abdomen (OA) permits the application of damage control surgery principles when abdominal trauma, sepsis, severe acute peritonitis and abdominal compartmental syndrome (ACS) occur.

Methods

Non-traumatic patients treated with OA between January 2010 and December 2015 were identified in a prospective database, and the data collected were retrospectively reviewed. Patients’ records were collected from charts and the surgical and intensive care unit (ICU) registries. The Acosta “modified” technique was used to achieve fascial closure in vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) patients. Sex, age, simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II), abdominal compartmental syndrome (ACS), cardiovascular disease (CVD) and surgical technique performed were evaluated in a multivariate analysis for mortality and fascial closure prediction.

Results

Ninety-six patients with a median age of 69 (40–78) years were included in the study. Sixty-nine patients (72%) underwent VAWCM. Forty-one patients (68%) achieved primary fascia closure: two patients (5%) were treated with VAWC (37 median days) versus 39 patients (95%) who were treated with VAWCM (10 median days) (p = 0.0003). Forty-eight patients underwent OA treatment due to ACS, and 24 patients (50%) survived compared to 36 patients (75%) from the “other reasons” group (p = 0.01). The ACS group required longer mechanical ventilator support (p = 0.006), length of stay in hospital (p = 0.005) and in ICU (p = 0.04) and had higher SAPS II scores (p = 0.0002).

Conclusions

The survival rate was 62%. ACS (p = 0.01), SAPS II (p = 0.004), sex (p = 0.01), pre-existing CVD (p = 0.0007) and surgical technique (VAWC vs VAWCM) (p = 0.0009) were determined to be predictors of mortality. Primary fascial closure was obtained in 68% of cases. VAWCM was found to grant higher survival and primary fascial closure rate.

AuNPs-PCL nanocomposite accelerated abdominal wound healing through photothermal effect and improving cell adhesion

Accelerating wound healing with modified biomaterial has been an attracting field in both material science and medicine. Enhanced cell adhesion could be acquired by improving surface hydrophilicity, which contributes to accelerating wound healing. Chemical reaction has been used for surface modification, but this study used a simple and nontoxic method to improve the hydrophilicity. Polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffold has been regarded as promising material for wound healing while its surface is hydrophobic. Our study demonstrated enhanced hydrophilicity of PCL with AuNPs coating. AuNPs has good biocompatibility and excellent photothermal effect. The coating of AuNPs not only improved the cell adhesion, but also gave PCL the ability to inhibit the growth of bacteria. Animal study showed that the nanocomposites decreased lymphocytes and neutrophils, increased neovascularization and accelerated the abdominal wound healing, which was attributed to improved hydrophilicity and the antibacterial ability. In conclusion, we demonstrated that the nanocomposite could be used as a potential scaffold for cell adhesion and wound healing, and the role of AuNPs was highlighted as a kind of outstanding supplement.

Closed Or Open after Source Control Laparotomy for Severe Complicated Intra-Abdominal Sepsis (the COOL trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. Principles of treatment include early antibiotic administration and operative source control. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with active negative peritoneal pressure therapy (ANPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and ameliorate the systemic damage from SCIAS. Although there is now a biologic rationale for such an intervention as well as non-standardized and erratic clinical utilization, this remains a novel therapy with potential side effects and clinical equipoise.

Methods

The Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) study will constitute a prospective randomized controlled trial that will randomly allocate eligible surgical patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or use of the OA with application of an ANPTT dressing. Patients will be eligible if they have free uncontained intra-peritoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR a Predisposition-Infection-Response-Organ Dysfunction Score ≥ 3 or a World-Society-of-Emergency-Surgery-Sepsis-Severity-Score ≥ 8. The primary outcome will be 90-day survival. Secondary outcomes will be logistical, physiologic, safety, bio-mediators, microbiological, quality of life, and health-care costs. Secondary outcomes will include days free of ICU, ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and hospital at 30 days from the index laparotomy. Physiologic secondary outcomes will include changes in intensive care unit illness severity scores after laparotomy. Bio-mediator outcomes for participating centers will involve measurement of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10, procalcitonin, activated protein C (APC), high-mobility group box protein-1, complement factors, and mitochondrial DNA. Economic outcomes will comprise standard costing for utilization of health-care resources.

Discussion

Although facial closure after SCIAS is considered the current standard of care, many reports are suggesting that OA management may improve outcomes in these patients. This trial will be powered to demonstrate a mortality difference in this highly lethal and morbid condition to ensure critically ill patients are receiving the best care possible and not being harmed by inappropriate therapies based on opinion only.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03163095.

The open abdomen in trauma and non-trauma patients: WSES guidelines

Damage control resuscitation may lead to postoperative intra-abdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome. These conditions may result in a vicious, self-perpetuating cycle leading to severe physiologic derangements and multiorgan failure unless interrupted by abdominal (surgical or other) decompression. Further, in some clinical situations, the abdomen cannot be closed due to the visceral edema, the inability to control the compelling source of infection or the necessity to re-explore (as a "planned second-look" laparotomy) or complete previously initiated damage control procedures or in cases of abdominal wall disruption. The open abdomen in trauma and non-trauma patients has been proposed to be effective in preventing or treating deranged physiology in patients with severe injuries or critical illness when no other perceived options exist. Its use, however, remains controversial as it is resource consuming and represents a non-anatomic situation with the potential for severe adverse effects. Its use, therefore, should only be considered in patients who would most benefit from it. Abdominal fascia-to-fascia closure should be done as soon as the patient can physiologically tolerate it. All precautions to minimize complications should be implemented.

Open Abdomen Management and Candida Infections: A Very Likely Link

OBJECTIVE

Laparostomy can be applied in trauma, abdominal sepsis, intra-abdominal hypertension, or compartment syndrome. Systemic infections, especially if complicated by Candida, are associated with a high risk of mortality.

METHODS

This is a single-centre retrospective case series of 47 cases admitted to our Department, which required laparostomy procedure; we analyzed the type of surgery, temporary abdominal closure, duration of open abdomen, complications, SOFA score, mortality with Candida infections, and empirical or targeted antifungal therapy.

RESULTS

We found that patients with Candida infection were related with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) with a complication after OA closure, total complications, time elapsed after OA application, time spent on the first surgical OA application, type of temporary abdominal closure that is used, and duration of the open abdomen. The use of empirical and targeted antifungal therapy is related to the duration of open abdomen too.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of the OA is often burdened by sepsis or septic shock, especially when complicated by Candida infection. Candida score is a validated tool to identify patients who can be treated empirically, but every situation must be considered on an individual basis.

Open Abdomen Treated with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy: Indications, Management and Survival

BACKGROUND

Open abdomen treatment (OAT) is a significant burden for patients and is associated with considerable mortality. The primary aim of this study was to report survival and cause of mortality after OAT. Secondary aims were to evaluate length of stay (LOS) in intensive care unit (ICU) and in hospital, time to abdominal closure and major complications.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively registered patients undergoing OAT between October 2006 and June 2014 at Trondheim University Hospital, Norway.

RESULTS

The 118 patients with OAT had a median age of 63 (20-88) years. OAT indications were abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) (n = 53), prophylactic (n = 29), abdominal contamination/second look laparotomy (n = 22), necrotizing fasciitis (n = 7), hemorrhage packing (n = 4) and full-thickness wound dehiscence (n = 3). Eight percent were trauma patients. Vacuum-assisted wound closure (VAWC) with mesh-mediated traction (VAWCM) was used in 92 (78 %) patients, the remaining 26 (22 %) had VAWC only. Per-protocol primary fascial closure rate was 84 %. Median time to abdominal closure was 12 days (1-143). LOS in the ICU was 15 (1-89), and in hospital 29 (1-246) days. Eighty-one (68 %) patients survived the hospital stay. Renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) (OR 3.9, 95 % CI 1.37-11.11), ACS (OR 3.1, 95 % CI 1.19-8.29) and advanced age (OR 1.045, 95 % CI 1.004-1.088) were independent predictors of mortality in multivariate analysis. The nine patients with an entero-atmospheric fistula (EAF) survived.

CONCLUSION

Two-thirds of the patients treated with OAT survived. Renal failure with RRT, ACS and advanced age were predictors of mortality, whereas EAF was not associated with increased mortality.

Open Abdomen Therapy with Vacuum and Mesh Mediated Fascial Traction After Aortic Repair: an International Multicentre Study

OBJECTIVES

Open abdomen therapy may be necessary to prevent or treat abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). The aim of the study was to analyse the primary delayed fascial closure (PDFC) rate and complications after open abdomen therapy with vacuum and mesh mediated fascial traction (VACM) after aortic repair and to compare outcomes between those treated with open abdomen after primary versus secondary operation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort, multicentre study in Sweden, Finland, and Norway, including consecutive patients treated with open abdomen and VACM after aortic repair at six vascular centres in 2006-2015. The primary endpoint was PDFC rate.

RESULTS

Among 191 patients, 155 were men. The median age was 71 years (IQR 66-76). Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) occurred in 69.1%. Endovascular/hybrid and open repairs were performed in 49 and 142 patients, respectively. The indications for open abdomen were inability to close the abdomen (62%) at primary operation and ACS (80%) at secondary operation. Duration of open abdomen was 11 days (IQR 7-16) in 157 patients alive at open abdomen termination. The PDFC rate was 91.8%. Open abdomen initiated at primary (N=103), compared with secondary operation (N=88), was associated with less severe initial open abdomen status (p=.006), less intestinal ischaemia (p=.002), shorter duration of open abdomen (p=.007), and less renal replacement therapy (RRT, p<.001). In hospital mortality was 39.3%, and after entero-atmospheric fistula (N=9) was 88.9%. Seven developed graft infection within 6 months, 1 year mortality was 28.6%. Intestinal ischaemia (OR 3.71, 95% CI 1.55-8.91), RRT (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.72-7.65), and age (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06-1.12), were independent factors associated with in hospital mortality, but not open abdomen initiated at primary versus secondary operation.

CONCLUSIONS

VACM was associated with a high PDFC rate after prolonged open abdomen therapy following aortic repair. Patient outcomes seemed better when open abdomen was initiated at primary, compared with secondary operation but a selection effect is possible.

The role of open abdomen in non-trauma patient: WSES Consensus Paper

The open abdomen (OA) is defined as intentional decision to leave the fascial edges of the abdomen un-approximated after laparotomy (laparostomy). The abdominal contents are potentially exposed and therefore must be protected with a temporary coverage, which is referred to as temporal abdominal closure (TAC). OA use remains widely debated with many specific details deserving detailed assessment and clarification. To date, in patients with intra-abdominal emergencies, the OA has not been formally endorsed for routine utilization; although, utilization is seemingly increasing. Therefore, the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Abdominal Compartment Society (WSACS) and the Donegal Research Academy united a worldwide group of experts in an international consensus conference to review and thereafter propose the basis for evidence-directed utilization of OA management in non-trauma emergency surgery and critically ill patients. In addition to utilization recommendations, questions with insufficient evidence urgently requiring future study were identified.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy versus modified Barker Vacuum Pack as temporary abdominal closure technique for Open Abdomen management: a four-year experience

Background

We reviewed our experience with patients presenting with trauma and peritonitis who underwent an open abdomen (OA) procedure, and compared outcomes between Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) and a modified Barker Vacuum Pack (mBVP) technique.

Methods

In this descriptive study, we retrospectively analyzed data regarding all patients who underwent OA for intra-abdominal sepsis or abdominal trauma at our Centre from January 2012 to December 2015. Demographic data, co-morbidities, indications to surgery, intra-operative details and Björck classification grade were considered. Outcomes included were: time to closure in days, fascial closure rates, ICU and hospital stay, in-hospital and overall mortality, and entero-atmospheric fistula rate.

Results

A total of 83 cases were considered. Mean closure time was 6 days versus 6.5 days (p = 0.71) in NPWT and mBVP groups, respectively; the fascial closure rate was 75.4% versus 93.8% (p = 0.10). At multivariate analysis, in-hospital and overall mortality were significantly higher within the mBVP, as compared to NPWT (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 13.1, p = 0.02 – OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 14.1, p = 0.01). Entero-atmospheric fistula rate was 2.6% in the two groups.

Conclusions

NPWT as a temporary abdominal closure technique, as compared to mBVP, appears to be associated with better outcomes in terms of mortality.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12893-017-0281-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.