The Utility of Prevena Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Groin Incisions for Critical Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Single Institution Experience.

BACKGROUND: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) is an adjunctive treatment that uses constant negative pressure suction to facilitate healing. The utility of this treatment modality on vascular operations for critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has yet to be elucidated. This study compares the incidence of postoperative wound complications between the Prevena Incision Management System, a type of iNPWT, and standard wound dressings for vascular patients who also underwent plastic surgery closure of groin incisions for CLTI. METHOD: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 40 patients with CLTI who underwent 53 open vascular surgeries with subsequent sartorius muscle flap closure. Patient demographics, intraoperative details, and wound complications were measured from 2015 to 2018 at the University of California San Francisco. Two cohorts were generated based on the modality of postoperative wound management and compared on wound healing outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 53 groin incisions, 29 were managed with standard dressings, and 24 received iNPWT. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Patients who received iNPWT had a significantly lower rate of infection (8.33% vs 31.0%, P = 0.04) and dehiscence (0% vs 41.3%, P < 0.01). Furthermore, the iNPWT group had a significantly lower rate of reoperation (0% vs 17.2%, P = 0.03) for wound complications within 30 days compared with the control group and a moderately reduced rate of readmission (4.17% vs 20.7%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of infection, reoperation, and dehiscence were significantly reduced in patients whose groin incisions were managed with iNPWT compared with standard wound care. Readmission rates were also decreased, but this difference was not statistically significant. Our results suggest that implementing iNPWT for the management of groin incisions, particularly in patients undergoing vascular operations for CLTI, may significantly improve clinical outcomes.

Functional donor-site morbidity following reconstruction with pectoralis major flaps: A systematic review.

Background: Pectoralis major muscle/myocutaneous flaps (PMMFs) are commonly used in reconstructive surgery, but may result in shoulder disability on the donor side. A systematic review evaluating this morbidity could be beneficial for guiding patients and providers considering this procedure. Methods: In October 2022, a systematic review of studies evaluating quantitative/qualitative measures of functional morbidity after PMMF was conducted. The results were categorized into PMMF's effect on range of motion (ROM), strength, and ability to complete shoulder-related activities/quality of life. Results: Eleven studies were included for analysis, which analyzed standard PMMF and two PMMF variants that spared portions of the muscle. Three of five studies demonstrated reduced shoulder ROM for standard PMMF versus controls lasting at least 4 months after head and neck reconstruction. Two of five studies, including two prospective studies demonstrated reduced shoulder strength for standard PMMF versus controls lasting at least 3 months after surgery. Five of nine studies found significant impairment in the ability to conduct shoulder-related activities, including work, up to one year postoperatively for standard PMMF versus controls. Muscle-sparing PMMF variants exhibited more promising outcomes in some categories. Conclusion: Standard PMMF results in prolonged reductions in shoulder ROM and strength, which may impair patients in shoulder-related activities. Other reconstructive options should be considered in patients who frequently participate in such activities. For patients requiring PMMF, muscle-sparing PMMF variants should be considered as alternatives to the standard PMMF.

Instrument and Supply Variability: An Opportunity to Reduce the Carbon Footprint of the Operating Room.

INTRODUCTION: Reducing costs and carbon footprints are important, parallel priorities for the US health-care system. Within surgery, reducing the number of instruments that are sterilized and disposable supplies that are used for each operation may help achieve both goals. We wanted to measure the existing variability in surgical instrument and supply choices and assess whether standardization could have a meaningful cost and environmental impact. METHODS: We analyzed surgeon preference cards for common general surgery operations at our hospital to measure the number of sterilizable instrument trays and supplies used by each surgeon for each operation. From this data, we calculated supply costs, carbon footprint, and median operative time and studied the variability in each of these metrics. RESULTS: Among the ten operations studied, variability in sterilizable instrument trays requested on surgeon preference cards ranged from one to eight. Variability in disposable supplies requested ranged from 17 to 45. Variability in open supply costs ranged from $104 to $4184. Variability in carbon footprint ranged from 17 to 708 kg CO2e. If the highest-cost surgeon for each operation switched their preference card to that of the median-cost surgeon, $245,343 in open supply costs and 41,708 kg CO2e could be saved. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in the instrument and supply choices of surgeons performing common general surgery operations. Standardizing this variability may lead to meaningful cost savings and carbon footprint reduction, especially if scaled across the entire health system.