Outcomes of Two Different Negative Pressure Therapy Systems for Closed Incision Management in Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) has been adopted into practices of diverse surgical specialties to help reduce postsurgical complication risks. There are two primary commercially available systems that deliver ciNPT through different mechanisms. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the potential effects of two different ciNPT systems on clinical outcomes following hip and knee arthroplasty. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify hip and knee arthroplasty studies comparing the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) and surgical site complications (SSCs) versus standard of care (SOC) following the use of two different ciNPT systems. Four meta-analyses were performed by calculating risk ratios (RR) to assess the effect of (1) ciNPT with foam dressing (ciNPT-F) versus SOC and (2) ciNPT with multilayer absorbent dressing (ciNPT-MLA) versus SOC. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 3.0 (Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ) software was used to perform the analyses. Twelve studies comparing ciNPT-F to SOC and six studies comparing ciNPT-MLAto SOC were analyzed. SSI rates were reported in seven of 12 studies involving ciNPT-F. In those, ciNPT-F significantly reduced the incidence of SSI (RR = .401, 95% confidence interval (CI) = .190, .844; p = .016). Across four of six studies that reported SSI rates, there was no significant difference in SSI rates between ciNPT-MLAvs SOC (RR = .580, 95% CI = .222, 1.513; p = .265). SSC rates were evaluated in eight of 12 ciNPT-F studies that reported SSC rates. This meta-analysis of the eight ciNPT-F studies showed significantly reduced SSC rates with ciNPT-F vs SOC (RR = .332, 95% CI = .236, .467; p < 0.001). For ciNPT-MLA, five of six studies reported SSC rates. In those, there was no significant difference in SSC rates between ciNPT-MLA vs SOC (RR = .798, 95% CI = .458, 1.398; p = .425). These meta-analyses results showed a significant reduction in SSI and SSC rates in the ciNPT-F group vs SOC and no difference in SSI and SSC rates in the ciNPT-MLA group vs SOC. The reasons for these observed differences were not evaluated as part of this study. Future controlled clinical studies comparing outcomes between different ciNPT systems over closed orthopedic incisions would help to validate these study results.

Single use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) system in the management of knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Wound complication, skin blister formation in particular, causes devastating consequences after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) tries to improve wound management leading to decrease length of hospital stay and better clinical outcomes. Low body mass index (BMI) could play a part in wound recovery management although lacking evidence. This study compared length of hospital stay and clinical outcomes between NPWT and Conventional groups, and factors affected and how BMI affected.

METHODS

This was a retrospective clinical record review of 255 (160 NPWT and 95 Conventional) patients between 2018 and 2022. Patient demographics including body mass index (BMI), surgical details (unilateral or bilateral), length of hospital stay, clinical outcomes including skin blisters occurrence, and major wound complications were investigated.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients at surgery was 69.95 (66.3% were female). Patients treated with NPWT stayed significantly longer in the hospital after joint replacement (5.18 days vs. 4.55 days; p = 0.01). Significantly fewer patients treated with NPWT found to have blisters (No blisters: 95.0% vs. 87.4%; p = 0.05). In patients with BMI < 30, percentage of patients requiring dressing change was significantly lower when treated with NPWT than conventional (0.8% vs. 33.3%).

CONCLUSION

Percentage of blisters occurrence in patients who underwent joint replacement surgery is significantly lower using NPWT. Patients using NPWT stayed significantly longer in the hospital after surgery because significant proportion received bilateral surgery. NPWT patients with BMI < 30 were significantly less likely to change wound dressing.

The Utility of Perioperative Products for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Total Knee Arthroplasty and Lower Extremity Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most prevalent and devastating complications following lower extremity total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Strategies to reduce the rates can be divided into preoperative, perioperatives, and postoperative measures. A multicenter trial is underway to evaluate the efficacy of implementing a bundled care program for SSI prevention in lower extremity TJA including: (1) nasal decolonization; (2) surgical skin antisepsis; (3) antimicrobial incise draping; (4) temperature management; and (5) negative-pressure wound therapy for selected high-risk patients. The purposes of this systematic review were to provide a background and then to summarize the available evidence pertaining to each of these SSI-reduction strategies with special emphasis on total knee arthroplasty. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines. Five individual literature searches were performed to identify studies evaluating nasal decolonization temperature management, surgical skin antisepsis, antimicrobial incise draping, and negative-pressure wound therapy. The highest level of evidence reports was used in each product review, and if there were insufficient arthroplasty papers on the particular topic, then papers were further culled from the surgical specialties to form the basis for the review. There was sufficient literature to assess all of the various prophylactic and preventative techniques. All five products used in the bundled program were supported for use as prophylactic agents or for the direct reduction of SSIs in both level I and II studies. This systematic review showed that various pre-, intra-, and postoperative strategies are efficacious in decreasing the risks of SSIs following lower extremity TJA procedures. Thus, including them in the armamentarium for SSI-reduction strategies for hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons should decrease the incidence of infections. We expect that the combined use of these products in an upcoming study will support these findings and may further enhance the reduction of total knee arthroplasty SSIs in a synergistic manner.

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

BACKGROUND

Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2021, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology. Our primary outcomes were SSI, mortality, and wound dehiscence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this fourth update, we added 18 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one new economic study, resulting in a total of 62 RCTs (13,340 included participants) and six economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in a wide range of surgeries, including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Eleven studies (6384 participants) which reported mortality were pooled. There is low-certainty evidence showing there may be a reduced risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (0.84%) compared with standard dressings (1.17%) but there is uncertainty around this as confidence intervals include risk of benefits and harm; risk ratio (RR) 0.78 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.30; I² = 0%). Fifty-four studies reported SSI; 44 studies (11,403 participants) were pooled. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT probably results in fewer SSIs (8.7% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (11.75%) after surgery; RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.85; I² = 29%). Thirty studies reported wound dehiscence; 23 studies (8724 participants) were pooled. There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference in dehiscence between people treated with NPWT (6.62%) and those treated with standard dressing (6.97%), although there is imprecision around the estimate that includes risk of benefit and harms; RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.16; I² = 4%). Evidence was downgraded for imprecision, risk of bias, or a combination of these. Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence for the outcomes of reoperation and seroma; in each case, confidence intervals included both benefit and harm. There may be a reduced risk of reoperation favouring the standard dressing arm, but this was imprecise: RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.41; I² = 2%; 18 trials; 6272 participants). There may be a reduced risk of seroma for people treated with NPWT but this is imprecise: the RR was 0.82 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05; I² = 0%; 15 trials; 5436 participants). For skin blisters, there is low-certainty evidence that people treated with NPWT may be more likely to develop skin blisters compared with those treated with standard dressing (RR 3.55; 95% CI 1.43 to 8.77; I² = 74%; 11 trials; 5015 participants). The effect of NPWT on haematoma is uncertain (RR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.48 to 1.30; I² = 0%; 17 trials; 5909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There is low-certainty evidence of little to no difference in reported pain between groups. Pain was measured in different ways and most studies could not be pooled; this GRADE assessment is based on all fourteen trials reporting pain; the pooled RR for the proportion of participants who experienced pain was 1.52 (95% CI 0.20, 11.31; I² = 34%; two studies; 632 participants). Cost-effectiveness Six economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in five indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty; coronary artery bypass grafts; and vascular surgery with inguinal incisions. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years or an equivalent, and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the evidence certainty varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

People with primary closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSIs  than people treated with standard dressings but there is probably no difference in wound dehiscence (moderate-certainty evidence). There may be a reduced risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT compared with standard dressings but there is uncertainty around this as confidence intervals include risk of benefit and harm (low-certainty evidence). People treated with NPWT may experience more instances of skin blistering compared with standard dressing treatment (low-certainty evidence). There are no clear differences in other secondary outcomes where most evidence is low or very low-certainty. Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes.

Parsonage-Turner Syndrome and Closed-Incision Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy After Total Hip Arthroplasty in a Case of Marfan Syndrome

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is a postoperative wound care method, which has recently become an ongoing field of research in hip and knee arthroplasty. We report the successful management of wound dehiscence and infection after THA in a case of Marfan syndrome by closed-incision negative-pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT). Our patient also developed a rare postoperative neurologic complication, that is, Parsonage-Turner syndrome (PTS). To our knowledge, this is the first report of PTS and ciNPWT use for SSI after THA in a Marfan patient. As wound dehiscence and infection can occur after THA in Marfan patients, we propose ciNPWT as an option to treat or even prevent (prophylactic use) such complications in this rare group of patients.

Closed-incision negative pressure therapy at -125 mmHg significantly reduces surgical site complications following total hip and knee arthroplasties: A stratified meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPT) has shown promising effects for managing infected wounds. This meta-analysis explores the current state of knowledge on ciNPT in orthopedics and addresses whether ciNPT at -125 mmHg or -80 mmHg or conventional dressing reduces the incidence of surgical site complications in hip and knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and Cochrane Handbook. Prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ciNPT use compared to conventional dressings following hip and knee surgeries were considered for inclusion. Non-stratified and stratified meta-analyses of six RCTs were conducted to test for confounding and biases. A P value less than .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The included six RCTs have 611 patients. Total hip and knee arthroplasties were performed for 51.7% and 48.2% of the included population, respectively. Of 611 patients, conventional dressings were applied in 315 patients and 296 patients received ciNPT. Two ciNPT systems have been used across the six RCTs; PREVENA Incision Management System (-125 mmHg) (63.1%) and PICO dressing (-80 mmHg) (36.8%). The non-stratified analysis showed that the ciNPT system had a statistically significant, lower risk of persistent wound drainage as compared to conventional dressing following total hip and knee arthroplasties (OR = 0.28; P = .002). There was no difference between ciNPT and conventional dressings in terms of wound hematoma, blistering, seroma, and dehiscence. The stratified meta-analysis indicated that patients undergoing treatment with high-pressure ciNPT (120 mmHg) displayed significantly fewer overall complications and persistent wound drainage (P = .00001 and P = .002, respectively) when compared to low-pressure ciNPT (80 mmHg) and conventional dressings. In addition, ciNPT is associated with shorter hospital stays. (P = .005).

CONCLUSION

When compared to conventional wound dressing and -80 mmHg ciNPT, the use of -125 mmHg ciNPT is recommended in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty.

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for Elective Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Persistent wound drainage after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) increases the risk of surgical site infections (SSIs). Closed incision negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) decreases infections in traumatic wounds, but evidence for its use after elective TJA is limited. The purpose of this meta-analysis of level I studies is to determine the effect of ciNPWT on risk of SSI and wound complications following TJA.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing ciNPWT vs standard dressings after total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Studies exclusively involving THA for femoral neck fractures were excluded. Risk of SSI and noninfectious wound complications (blisters, seroma, hematoma, persistent drainage, dehiscence, and wound edge necrosis) following TJA were analyzed.

RESULTS

SSI risk was lower with ciNPWT compared to standard dressings (3.4% vs 7%; relative risk [RR] 0.48, P = .007), specifically in revision THA and TKA (4.1% vs 10.5%; RR 0.41, P = .03). ciNPWT increased the noninfectious complication risk after primary TKA (RR 4.71, P < .0001), especially causing wound blistering (RR 12.66, P < .0001). ciNPWT decreased hospital length of stay by 0.73 days (P = .04) and reoperation rate (RR 0.28, P = .01).

CONCLUSION

ciNPWT decreases SSI risk compared to standard dressings after revision TJA, but not primary TJA. ciNPWT is associated with >12-fold increased risk of wound blistering after primary TKA. ciNPWT plays a role in revision TJA management, but additional randomized controlled trials with uniform wound assessment methods must be performed to sufficiently power findings and draw conclusions on the use of ciNPWT after primary TJA.

Closed Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (ciNPWT) in Oncological Orthopedic Surgery: Preliminary Report

This report presents the authors' experience with surgical wound-healing using a negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) device in a population of oncological orthopedic patients. Two groups of 26 oncological patients each underwent surgical excision. After surgery, the control group received standard dressings and the closed incisional NPWT (ciNPWT) group was treated with a ciNPWT system on the sutured wound area for 14 days. As a primary endpoint, the percentage of post-surgery wound-site complications using ciNPWT devices was compared to that with standard patch dressings. Overall, 30.7% of the control group and 7.7% of the ciNPWT group manifested wound-site complications within 2 weeks after surgery. As a secondary endpoint, final wound healing was compared between the groups: delayed wound healing was observed in 4 (15.4%) patients in the control group and in none (0%) of those in the ciNPWT group. Finally, the length of stay (LOS) was 6.3 days in the control group and 5.1 days in the ciNPWT group. These results suggest that the ciNPWT device could be beneficial in minimizing the incidence of short-term surgical-site complications and decreasing length of stay in high-risk patients, such as those undergoing oncological orthopedic surgery.

Clinical and Health-Care Cost Analysis of Negative Pressure Dressing in Primary and RevisionTotal Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been used because of its perceived advantages in reducing surgical site infections, wound complications, and the need for further surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess the infection rates, wound complications, length of stay, and financial burden associated with NPWT use in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

We performed a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) systematic review of the existing literature on using NPWT in primary and revision TKA. PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, and the Cochrane Library were utilized. The risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria.

RESULTS

Twelve articles that evaluated 1,403 primary TKAs and 279 revision TKAs were reviewed. NPWT significantly reduced complication rates in revision TKA. However, there was no significant difference in infection rates between NPWT and regular dressings in primary or revision TKA. NPWT use in primary TKA significantly increased the risk of blistering, although no increase in reoperations was noted. The analysis showed a possible reduction in length of stay associated with NPWT use for both primary and revision TKA, with overall health-care cost savings.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a meta-analysis of the existing literature, we do not recommend the routine use of NPWT. However, in high-risk revision TKA and selected primary TKA cases, NPWT reduced wound complications and may have health-care cost savings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

BACKGROUND

Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another type of NPWT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

In this third update, we added 15 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three new economic studies, resulting in a total of 44 RCTs (7447 included participants) and five economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in the context of a wide range of surgeries including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. Economic studies assessed NPWT in orthopaedic, obstetric and general surgical settings. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Four studies (2107 participants) reported mortality. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (2.3%) compared with standard dressings (2.7%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.47; I2 = 0%). Thirty-nine studies reported SSI; 31 of these (6204 participants), were included in meta-analysis. There is moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias) that NPWT probably results in fewer SSI (8.8% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (13.0% of participants) after surgery; RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80 ; I2 = 23%). Eighteen studies reported dehiscence; 14 of these (3809 participants) were included in meta-analysis. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of dehiscence after surgery for NPWT (5.3% of participants) compared with standard dressings (6.2% of participants) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence showing no clear difference between NPWT and standard treatment for the outcomes of reoperation and incidence of seroma. For reoperation, the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.41; I2 = 13%; 12 trials; 3523 participants); for seroma, the RR was 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.05; I2 = 0%; seven trials; 729 participants). The effect of NPWT on occurrence of haematoma or skin blisters is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence); for haematoma, the RR was 0.67 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.59; I2 = 0%; nine trials; 1202 participants) and for blisters the RR was 2.64 (95% CI 0.65 to 10.68; I2 = 69%; seven trials; 796 participants). The overall effect of NPWT on pain is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence from seven trials (2218 participants) which reported disparate measures of pain); but moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably little difference between the groups in pain after three or six months following surgery for lower limb fracture (one trial, 1549 participants). There is also moderate-certainty evidence for women undergoing caesarean sections (one trial, 876 participants) and people having surgery for lower limb fractures (one trial, 1549 participants) that there is probably little difference in quality of life scores at 30 days or 3 or 6 months, respectively. Cost-effectiveness Five economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials included in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in four indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years for treatment groups and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the grade of the evidence varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

People experiencing primary wound closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSI than people treated with standard dressings (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no clear difference in number of deaths or wound dehiscence between people treated with NPWT and standard dressings (low-certainty evidence). There are also no clear differences in secondary outcomes where all evidence was low or very low-certainty. In caesarean section in obese women and surgery for lower limb fracture, there is probably little difference in quality of life scores (moderate-certainty evidence). Most evidence on pain is very low-certainty, but there is probably no difference in pain between NPWT and standard dressings after surgery for lower limb fracture (moderate-certainty evidence). Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes.

Are high-risk patient and revision arthroplasty effective indications for closed-incisional negative-pressure wound therapy after total hip or knee arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis

To determine the effective indications of closed-incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) following total hip or knee arthroplasty, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. The systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and 11 studies were included. The studies comparing between ciNPWT and conventional dressings were categorised into following subgroups based on patient risk and revision procedures: routine vs high-risk patient; primary vs revision arthroplasty. Pooled estimates were calculated for wound complication and surgical site infection (SSI) rates in the subgroup analyses using Review Manager. In high-risk patients, the overall rates of wound complication (odds ratio [OR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.93; P = .030) and SSI (OR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.09-0.64; P = .005) were significantly lower in the ciNPWT; however, there were no differences in routine patients. In cases involving revision arthroplasties, the overall rates of wound complication (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.18-0.62; P < .001) and SSI (OR = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.11-0.66; P = .004) were significantly lower in the ciNPWT; however, there were no differences in cases involving primary arthroplasties. In summary, ciNPWT showed a positive effect in decreasing the rates of wound complication and SSI in high-risk patients and in revision arthroplasties.

Closed Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy at Flap Suture Line: An Innovative Approach for Improving Outcomes in Suboptimal Wound Conditions

Background  Persistent dead space following flap cover is a frequently encountered challenge following the reconstruction of complex wounds. It may lead to a hematoma, seroma, wound infection, and wound dehiscence. Wound dehiscence could be a devastating complication. Closed incisional negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) over the surgical incisions was found to reduce surgical site infection (SSI) and wound dehiscence. We applied this principle at the closed flap suture line and through this article, we share the indications, technique, and outcomes.

Methods  A retrospective analysis (January 2018–June 2019), in which selected high-risk patients who underwent ciNPWT at the flap suture following complex reconstruction (pedicled or free flap) were included in the study. The indications include deep incisional/organ SSI after debridement and flap coverage, persistent dead space following flap coverage, chronic osteomyelitis. Patients were analyzed in the follow-up period in terms of complications, wound healing.

Results  Nine patients underwent ciNPWT over the flap suture line. The mean age was 32.2 years (range: 10–48 years). The mean duration of the NPWT application was 7.3 days (range: 3–21 days). Three of the nine patients had flap-related minor complications. One patient had marginal flap necrosis and required skin grafting, one patient had minor wound dehiscence (1 cm) which required secondary skin suturing and one patient had chronic discharging sinus related to osteomyelitis of ischium, which subsequently healed with antibiotics and local wound care. None of the patients had NPWT-related complications.

Conclusion  Closed incisional NPWT decreases the untoward effects of dead space following the reconstruction of complex wounds. The incidence of SSI and wound gaping can be reduced.

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

BACKGROUND

Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another type of NPWT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

In this third update, we added 15 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three new economic studies, resulting in a total of 44 RCTs (7447 included participants) and five economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in the context of a wide range of surgeries including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. Economic studies assessed NPWT in orthopaedic, obstetric and general surgical settings. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Four studies (2107 participants) reported mortality. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (2.3%) compared with standard dressings (2.7%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.47; I2 = 0%). Thirty-nine studies reported SSI; 31 of these (6204 participants), were included in meta-analysis. There is moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias) that NPWT probably results in fewer SSI (8.8% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (13.0% of participants) after surgery; RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80 ; I2 = 23%). Eighteen studies reported dehiscence; 14 of these (3809 participants) were included in meta-analysis. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of dehiscence after surgery for NPWT (5.3% of participants) compared with standard dressings (6.2% of participants) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence showing no clear difference between NPWT and standard treatment for the outcomes of reoperation and incidence of seroma. For reoperation, the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.41; I2 = 13%; 12 trials; 3523 participants); for seroma, the RR was 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.05; I2 = 0%; seven trials; 729 participants). The effect of NPWT on occurrence of haematoma or skin blisters is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence); for haematoma, the RR was 0.67 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.59; I2 = 0%; nine trials; 1202 participants) and for blisters the RR was 2.64 (95% CI 0.65 to 10.68; I2 = 69%; seven trials; 796 participants). The overall effect of NPWT on pain is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence from seven trials (2218 participants) which reported disparate measures of pain); but moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably little difference between the groups in pain after three or six months following surgery for lower limb fracture (one trial, 1549 participants). There is also moderate-certainty evidence for women undergoing caesarean sections (one trial, 876 participants) and people having surgery for lower limb fractures (one trial, 1549 participants) that there is probably little difference in quality of life scores at 30 days or 3 or 6 months, respectively. Cost-effectiveness Five economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials included in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in four indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years for treatment groups and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the grade of the evidence varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

People experiencing primary wound closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSI than people treated with standard dressings (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no clear difference in number of deaths or wound dehiscence between people treated with NPWT and standard dressings (low-certainty evidence). There are also no clear differences in secondary outcomes where all evidence was low or very low-certainty. In caesarean section in obese women and surgery for lower limb fracture, there is probably little difference in quality of life scores (moderate-certainty evidence). Most evidence on pain is very low-certainty, but there is probably no difference in pain between NPWT and standard dressings after surgery for lower limb fracture (moderate-certainty evidence). Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes.

The Effect of Negative Pressure Therapy on Closed Wound After the Orthopedic Surgery of Lower Limb: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Negative-pressure wound therapy is applied increasingly to manage closed wounds. However, no consensus has been reached with regard to surgical site infection and wound complication. Aim. To evaluate the effect of negative pressure therapy on closed wounds after orthopedic surgeries. Methods. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1966 to January 2019; the references in the identified studies were also searched. Results. Ten studies on arthroplasty and 3 studies on fractures were included. Significantly few infections appeared in the negative pressure group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.18-0.46, P < .001; I2 = 0%, P = .80). There was no significant difference for other complications (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.21-1.39, P = .20; I2 = 81%, P < .001). Few patients needed reoperation in the negative pressure group (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.14-0.53, P < .001; I2 = 0%, P = .82). Conclusion. Negative pressure therapy can decrease surgical site infection and reoperation of closed incisions.

Original hardware-software method for treatment of infected superficial wounds in a liquid environment

Aim ― development of a hardware-software system allowing to treat infected superficial wounds in a liquid environment, designed to provide continuous flow of various irrigation solutions (depending on the wound healing stage) under airtight and water-resistant film tightly fixed over the wound. Methods ― in this experiment wound irrigation with antiseptic, oxidizing antiseptic and osmotically active agents with subsequent exposure and drainage was performed using the novel device. Efficacy of the proposed hardware-software system was evaluated by comparing it with standard wound dressings by planimetry and wound biopsy results. Results ― according to study results the novel device reduces the time of wound healing by 26.1%, while the time to wound proliferation is 1.7 times shorter when compared with standard wound dressings. Conclusion ― the proposed method stimulates wound repair and limits purulent inflammation in infected wounds. Using the novel method of superficial wound management helps to prevent the development of re-infection and suppuration.

Comparison of the Efficacy Between Closed Incisional Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy and Conventional Wound Management After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Wound-related problems after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can cause periprosthetic joint infections. We sought to evaluate the effect of closed incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) on wound complications, skin blisters, surgical site infections (SSIs), reoperations, and length of hospitalization (LOH).

METHODS

Studies comparing ciNPWT with conventional dressings following THA and TKA were systematically searched on MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers performed the study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Funnel plots were employed to evaluate publication bias and forest plots to analyze pooled data.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included herein. The odds ratios (ORs) for wound complications and SSIs indicated a lack of publication bias. ciNPWT showed significantly lower risks of wound complication (OR, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.9; P = .027) and SSI (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.68; P < .001) than did conventional dressings. ciNPWT also yielded a significantly lower reoperation rate (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21-0.69; P = .001) and shorter LOH (mean difference, 0.41 days; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.32; P < .001). However, the rate of skin blisters was higher in ciNPWT (OR, 4.44; 95% CI, 2.24-8.79; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although skin blisters were more likely to develop in ciNPWT, the risks of wound complication, SSI, reoperation, and longer LOH decreased in ciNPWT compared with those in conventional dressings. This finding could alleviate the potential concerns regarding wound-related problems after THA and TKA.

Negative pressure wound therapy in total hip and knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Aim: To assess the efficiency and safety of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in the total hip and knee arthroplasty, we conducted a meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials. Methods: Potential academic articles were identified from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Springer and ScienceDirect. Secondary sources were identified from the references of the included literature. RevMan 5.1 was used to analyze the pooled data. Results: Six randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed more superficial surgical site infection and blisters in patients with total knee arthroplasty. There were no significant differences between two groups in total infection and total complications. Conclusion: NPWT decreased the incidence of superficial surgical site infection. More blisters were noticed in patients with NPWT after total knee arthroplasty.