Colorectal surgery surgical site infection prevention practices in British Columbia.

Surgical site infections (SSI) pose significant morbidity after colorectal surgery. We sought to document current practices in colorectal surgery SSI prevention in British Columbia (BC). Reporting the current provincial landscape on SSI prevention helps to understand the foundation upon which improvements can take place. We surveyed all BC surgeons performing elective colon and rectal resections, and 97 surveys were completed (60% response rate). Eighty-six per cent of respondent hospitals tracked SSI rates. The reported superficial SSI was less than 5% and the anastomotic leak/organ space rate was less than 10%. All respondents gave preoperative prophylactic antibiotics, with 24% continuing antibiotics postoperatively; 62% are using oral antibiotics (OAB) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and 29% use MBP without OAB. Areas for improvement include OAB with MBP and discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics postoperatively, as recommended by the World Health Organization.

Surgical Wound Complications after Colorectal Surgery with Single-Use Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Versus Surgical Dressing over Closed Incisions: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Global studies indicate that surgical site infections (SSIs) are a major healthcare challenge within hospitals and can have a profound impact on patient quality of life and healthcare costs. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy (ciNPT) has been reported to provide positive clinical benefits for patients with various incisions, including those following colorectal surgeries. METHODS: Investigators performed a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial to evaluate complications of surgical incisions in patients who received a ciNPT dressing versus a conventional surgical dressing (control) over their closed incision following colorectal surgery. The incidence of SSI was determined at 7, 15, and 30 days postsurgery. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients participated in the study. Results showed that the SSI rate on day 7 was lower in the ciNPT group versus the control group (10/75 [13.3%] vs 17/73 [23.3%]), but this difference was not statistically significant. On day 15, the SSI rate was 12/75 (16.0%) in the ciNPT group versus 21/73 (28.8%) in the control group; however, this difference was only marginally statistically significant (P = .0621). At 1 month, the SSI rate remained lower in the ciNPT group (13/75 [17.3%] vs 21/73 [28.8%], P = .0983) compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies with larger population sizes are necessary to determine the impact of ciNPT on patients' incisions after colorectal surgery.

Closed incision negative pressure wound therapy is associated with reduced surgical site infection after emergency laparotomy: A propensity matched-cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection contributes to a significant proportion of postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Surgical site infections cause significant patient burden, increase duration of stay, and have economic implications. Closed incision negative pressure therapy has been shown to reduce surgical site infection rates in patients undergoing elective laparotomy; however, there is limited evidence for their use in the emergency setting. This study aims to compare rates of surgical site infection between patients receiving closed incision negative pressure therapy and standard surgical dressing after emergency laparotomy through a propensity matched analysis. METHODS: A registry-based, prospective cohort study was undertaken using data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database at our center. The primary outcome measure was surgical site infection as defined by the Centers for Disease Control criteria. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative morbidity and grade, duration of stay, 30-day mortality, and readmission rates. A propensity-score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio to mitigate for selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 1,484 patients were identified from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit data set, and propensity-score matching resulted in 2 equally matched cohorts with 237 patients in each arm. The rate of surgical site infection was significantly lower in the closed incision negative pressure therapy cohort (16.9% vs 33.8%, P < .001). There were no overall differences in 30-day morbidity, Clavien-Dindo grade, Comprehensive Complication Index severity, length of hospital stay, reoperation rates, and 30-day mortality between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic closed incision negative pressure therapy in emergency laparotomy patients is associated with a reduction in surgical site infection rates.

Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy After Laparotomy for Gynecologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy in patients undergoing laparotomy for gynecologic surgery. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial. Eligible, consenting patients, regardless of body mass index (BMI), who were undergoing laparotomy for presumed gynecologic malignancy were randomly allocated to standard gauze or negative pressure wound therapy. Patients with BMIs of 40 or greater and benign disease also were eligible. Randomization, stratified by BMI, occurred after skin closure. The primary outcome was wound complication within 30 (±5) days of surgery. A sample size of 343 per group (N=686) was planned. RESULTS: From March 1, 2016, to August 20, 2019, we identified 663 potential patients; 289 were randomized to negative pressure wound therapy (254 evaluable participants) and 294 to standard gauze (251 evaluable participants), for a total of 505 evaluable patients. The median age of the entire cohort was 61 years (range 20-87). Four hundred ninety-five patients (98%) underwent laparotomy for malignancy. The trial was eventually stopped for futility after an interim analysis of 444 patients. The rate of wound complications was 17.3% in the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) group and 16.3% in the gauze group, absolute risk difference 1% (90% CI -4.5 to 6.5%; P=.77). Adjusted odds ratio controlling for estimated blood loss and diabetes was 0.99 (90% CI 0.62-1.60). Skin blistering occurred in 33 patients (13%) in the NPWT group and in three patients (1.2%) in the gauze group (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Negative pressure wound therapy after laparotomy for gynecologic surgery did not lower the wound complication rate but did increase skin blistering. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02682316. FUNDING SOURCE: The protocol was supported in part by KCI/Acelity.

Use of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy With Instillation and Dwell in Breast Reconstruction.

SUMMARY: The use of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has expanded over the last 3 decades, paralleled and documented by an increase in research. This article discusses the evolution and current applications of NPWT in modern breast reconstruction. Negative-pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwell (NPWTi-d) technology can be used to remove infectious material, facilitate salvaging compromised tissue, and stabilize the soft-tissue environment. Published consensus NPWTi-d guidelines can aid in treatment selection and implementation of this new technology. The therapeutic approach of simultaneously removing infectious material and actively improving mastectomy flap perfusion and thickness is a burgeoning concept, and illustrative cases are presented. NPWTi-d preliminary use has led to reconstruction salvage with reproducible early experience and outcomes, and it is hoped that it will raise interest and awareness of this promising application of the technology to improve breast reconstruction outcomes.

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy: Indications and Adherence to Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Complications associated with wound management not only increase the morbidity and mortality of surgical interventions but they also increase the cost and decrease the quality of care. Closed incision negative pressure therapy (CINPT) has been proposed as a superior method of wound care compared to the more traditional wound management methods. Since the Food and Drug Administration indications for using CINPT are broad and generally nonspecific, it is unclear whether patients are appropriately screened for and receive this treatment modality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To identify common clinical indications for CINPT, we conducted a literature review to define a consensus for CINPT candidates and used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database to indicate if certain patient demographics impact decision-making. RESULTS: Based on the literature review, encompassing 57 articles, and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, over 11,000 patients received CINPT. Both the NSQIP data and the literature review commonly reported BMI >30 (47.1% and 39.6%), smoking (22.7% and 29.2%), and diabetes mellitus (22.7% and 47.9) as the most common clinical indications for using CINPT. DISCUSSION: The most common indications for using CINPT according to the literature review and the NSQIP database are BMI > 30, smoking status, and diabetes mellitus. Besides identifying patients who potentially benefit the most from CINPT, the results of this study suggest clinical adherence to the practice guidelines reported in the literature regarding wound management using this treatment modality.

Negative-pressure wound therapy compared with standard dressings following surgical treatment of major trauma to the lower limb: the WHiST RCT.

BACKGROUND: Major trauma is the leading cause of death in people aged < 45 years. Patients with major trauma usually have lower-limb fractures. Surgery to fix the fractures is complicated and the risk of infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgery could potentially reduce the risk of infection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the deep surgical site infection rate, disability, quality of life, patient assessment of the surgical scar and resource use in patients with surgical incisions associated with fractures following major trauma to the lower limbs treated with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard dressings. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals representing the UK Major Trauma Network. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1548 adult patients were randomised from September 2016 to April 2018. Exclusion criteria included presentation > 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. INTERVENTIONS: Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (n = 785), in which a non-adherent absorbent dressing covered with a semipermeable membrane is connected to a pump to create a partial vacuum over the wound, versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure (n = 763). Trial participants and the treating surgeon could not be blinded to treatment allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Deep surgical site infection at 30 days was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were deep infection at 90 days, the results of the Disability Rating Index, health-related quality of life, the results of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and resource use collected at 3 and 6 months post surgery. RESULTS: A total of 98% of participants provided primary outcome data. There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of deep surgical site infection at 30 days. The infection rate was 6.7% (50/749) in the standard dressing group and 5.8% (45/770) in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (intention-to-treat odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.33; p = 0.52). There was no difference in the deep surgical site infection rate at 90 days: 13.2% in the standard dressing group and 11.4% in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.19; p = 0.32). There was no difference between the two groups in disability, quality of life or scar appearance at 3 or 6 months. Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy did not reduce the cost of treatment and was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS: Owing to the emergency nature of the surgery, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised would subsequently be unable or unwilling to participate. However, the majority of the patients (85%) agreed to participate. Therefore, participants were representative of the population with lower-limb fractures associated with major trauma. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to the lower limbs. FUTURE WORK: Our work suggests that the use of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy dressings in other at-risk surgical wounds requires further investigation. Future research may also investigate different approaches to reduce postoperative infections, for example the use of topical antibiotic preparations in surgical wounds and the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12702354 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio ID20416. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information.

WHAT DID THE TRIAL FIND?: We found no evidence of a difference in the rate of surgical site infection between those patients randomised to negative-pressure wound therapy and those patients randomised to standard wound dressings. There was no difference in the rate of other wound healing complications or in the patients' self-report of disability, health-related quality of life or scar healing. Negative-pressure wound therapy is very unlikely to be cost-effective for the NHS. In conclusion, and contrary to previous reports, the findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to their legs.

Major trauma is the leading cause of death worldwide in people aged < 45 years and a significant cause of short- and long-term health problems. In 85% of major trauma patients, the injury involves broken bones. Surgery to fix broken bones in the lower limbs is complicated and has risks, one of the main ones being wound infection. In these patients, rates of wound infection have been reported to be as high as 27%. One factor that may affect the risk of infection is the type of dressing applied after surgery. In this trial, we compared standard wound dressings with a new treatment called incisional negative-pressure wound therapy. Negative-pressure wound therapy is a special type of dressing whereby gentle suction is applied to the surface of the wound. A total of 1548 patients from 24 specialist trauma hospitals in the UK agreed to take part and were assigned at random to receive either a standard wound dressing or negative-pressure wound therapy after their surgery. We reviewed the recovery of the patients for 6 months. We recorded how many had an infection in the surgical wound and asked the patients to rate the extent of their disability, their quality of life and the scar healing. We also collected information about the cost of treatment.

Deep Learning-Based Risk Model for Best Management of Closed Groin Incisions After Vascular Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Reduced surgical site infection (SSI) rates have been reported with use of closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) in high-risk patients. METHODS: A deep learning-based, risk-based prediction model was developed from a large national database of 72,435 patients who received infrainguinal vascular surgeries involving upper thigh/groin incisions. Patient demographics, histories, laboratory values, and other variables were inputs to the multilayered, adaptive model. The model was then retrospectively applied to a prospectively tracked single hospital data set of 370 similar patients undergoing vascular surgery, with ciNPT or control dressings applied over the closed incision at the surgeon's discretion. Objective predictive risk scores were generated for each patient and used to categorize patients as "high" or "low" predicted risk for SSI. RESULTS: Actual institutional cohort SSI rates were 10/148 (6.8%) and 28/134 (20.9%) for high-risk ciNPT versus control, respectively (P < 0.001), and 3/31 (9.7%) and 5/57 (8.8%) for low-risk ciNPT versus control, respectively (P = 0.99). Application of the model to the institutional cohort suggested that 205/370 (55.4%) patients were matched with their appropriate intervention over closed surgical incision (high risk with ciNPT or low risk with control), and 165/370 (44.6%) were inappropriately matched. With the model applied to the cohort, the predicted SSI rate with perfect utilization would be 27/370 (7.3%), versus 12.4% actual rate, with estimated cost savings of $231-$458 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a subjective practice strategy, an objective risk-based strategy using prediction software may be associated with superior results in optimizing SSI rates and costs after vascular surgery.

Indications and Limitations of Bilayer Wound Matrix-Based Lower Extremity Reconstruction: A Multidisciplinary Case-Control Study of 191 Wounds.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the efficacy of newer skin substitute scaffolds to reconstruct complex lower extremity wounds. The investigators present a multihospital experience of reconstructive surgeons utilizing collagen-GAG bilayer wound matrix in lower extremity soft-tissue reconstruction with the goals to (1) characterize a suitable patient population, (2) categorize failures to optimize patient selection, and (3) determine wound factors affecting success. METHODS: Subjects underwent collagen-GAG-based lower extremity wound reconstruction from May of 2010 to June of 2017. The primary outcome variable was 180-day graft success, defined as eventual split-thickness skin grafting after bilayer wound matrix application; failure was defined as inadequate wound bed for split-thickness skin grafting, requirement for vascularized tissue transfer, or eventual amputation. Eligible subjects had at least one lower extremity wound and were at least 18 years old. Exclusion criteria included third-degree burn wounds or failure to follow up for at least 60 days postoperatively. Predictor variables included demographics, medical comorbidities, perioperative characteristics, postoperative complications, and cost-related data for each hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 147 subjects with 191 wounds. Mean patient age was 60.1 years (range, 21.0 to 95.6 years), and mean body mass index was 30.5 kg/m (range, 14.4 to 64.7 kg/m). Average wound size was 73.1 ± 137.7 cm, with 49.0 percent of subjects receiving adjunct postoperative negative-pressure wound therapy. Seventy percent of wounds were successfully healed at 180 days. Most were localized between the knee and ankle (50.8 percent) or foot (46.1 percent). Tendon exposure (p < 0.05), bone exposure (p < 0.01), and bone excision (p < 0.04) were associated with reconstructive failure. CONCLUSIONS: The authors present the largest reported multihospital, multidisciplinary experience with collagen-GAG wound matrix for lower extremity reconstruction. Tendon and/or bone exposure and socioeconomic factors were associated with failure. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Effects of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Wound Dehiscence and Surgical Site Infection Following Instrumented Spinal Fusion Surgery-A Single Surgeon's Experience.

BACKGROUND: Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is used in many surgical specialties to prevent postoperative dehiscence and surgical site infections (SSIs). However, little is known about the role of incisional NPWT in spine fusion surgery. Therefore, we sought to report a single surgeon's experience using incisional NPWT and describe its effects on dehiscence and SSIs after instrumented spine surgery. METHODS: We compared rates of hospital readmission and return to the operating room for dehiscence and SSIs in a consecutive series of patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery with or without NPWT from 2015 to 2018. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients without and 76 patients with NPWT were included for analysis. Half way through the data collection period, all patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion received NPWT. Three of 15 (20.0%) of non-NPWT patients who underwent anterior lumbar fusion had dehiscence or SSI compared with zero of 23 (0.0%) of NPWT patients (P = 0.01). NPWT for posterior surgeries was used on a case-by-case basis using risk factors that contribute to SSIs and dehiscence. NPWT patients had higher rates of spinal neoplasia (0.5% vs. 11.3%, P < 0.0001), osteomyelitis/diskitis (1.3% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.02), durotomy (14.9% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.007), revision surgery (32.2% vs. 59.6%, P = 0.0001), and longer fusion constructs (7 vs. 11 levels, P < 0.0001) but had similar rates of dehiscence and SSIs as non-NPWT patients (5.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: NPWT decreases dehiscence and SSIs in patients undergoing lumbar fusion through an anterior approach. When preferentially used in patients at high risk for postoperative wound complications, NPWT prevents increased rates of dehiscence and SSI.

Drainage after posterior single-level instrumented lumbar fusion: Natural pressure vs negative pressure.

Recent findings have shown a trend toward recommending against the routine use of drains in spinal surgery because it carries the risk for potential complications. However, most surgeons still use closed suction drainage to prevent hematoma formation. This study is to compare the clinical outcomes between natural pressure drainage and negative pressure drainage after posterior lumbar interbody fusion.Consecutive 132 patients who underwent spinal fusion in the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University and met the inclusion criteria were reviewed from January 2018 to January 2019 and divided into negative pressure drainage group and natural pressure drainage group according to different pressure drainage. There were 64 patients who had a negative pressure drainage placed and 68 patients who had a natural pressure drainage placed. Demographics, intraoperative blood loss, operative room time, drainage volume at the 1st postoperative day, total volume of postoperative drainage, the total drainage days, postoperative temperature, and postoperative complications (wound infection, symptomatic hematoma) were compared between the 2 groups.The median drainage volume at the 1st postoperative day in negative pressure group was 204.89 ±â€Š95.19 mL, while in natural pressure group, it was 141.00 ±â€Š52.19 mL (P = .000). The median total volume of postoperative drainage in negative pressure group was 378.06 ±â€Š117.98 mL, while in natural pressure group, it was 249.32 ±â€Š70.74 mL (P = .000). The median total drainage days between natural pressure group and negative pressure group were obviously different (2.93 ±â€Š0.55 vs 3.51 ±â€Š0.71 days, P = .000). There was no difference in patient characteristics, operative data, postoperative temperature, and complications.Natural pressure drainage significantly reduced postoperative drainage volume and indwelling time, but did not increase postoperative complications. Therefore, it may offer an alternative to negative pressure drainage and is as safe and effective as negative pressure drainage.

The safety and efficacy of using negative pressure incisional wound VACs in pediatric and neonatal patients.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) rates are an important surgical quality metric. Decreased SSI rates have been demonstrated using negative pressure incisional wound vac device (NPIWV) dressings in adults but have not been studied in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated with NPIWV at our institution between February 2016 and February 2018 was performed. NPIWV dressings were applied by previously described techniques. Using the same CPT codes from our study patients, we queried the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric (NSQIP-P) data between January 2014 and January 2016 to identify preimplementation controls (PIC). NPIWV patients were compared to historical controls to assess safety and efficacy of SSI prevention. RESULTS: There were 32 patients managed with NPIWV, and 65 patients in the PIC group. There were no NPIWV-associated complications. There was a trend toward reduced incidence of SSI in NPIWV patients, with 1 SSI in 32 cases (3.1%) versus 7 SSIs in the 65 historical control patients (10.8%) (p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that NPIWV dressings can be used safely in pediatric and neonatal patients undergoing surgery, with a trend toward decreased SSI rates. These findings should be confirmed in a larger, prospective trial. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Advantages of Damage Control Strategy With Abdominal Negative Pressure and Instillation in Patients With Diffuse Peritonitis From Perforated Diverticular Disease.

Purpose. To evaluate the results of Damage Control Strategy (DCS) in the treatment of generalized peritonitis from perforated diverticular disease in patients with preoperative severe systemic diseases. Methods. All the patients with diffuse peritonitis (Hinchey 3 and 4) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 were included and underwent DCS consisting of a 2-step procedure. The first was peritoneal lavage, perforated colon-stapled resection, and temporary abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation. The second step, 48 hours later, included the possibility of restoring intestinal continuity basing on local and general patients' conditions. Results. Thirty patients (18 [60%] women and 12 [40%] men, median age 68.5 [range = 35-84] years) were included (18 [60%] ASA III, 11 [36.7%] ASA IV, and 1 [0.03%] ASA V). Seven patients (23.3%) showed sepsis and 1 (3.33%) septic shock. At second surgery, 24 patients (80%) received a colorectal anastomosis and 6 patients (20%) underwent a Hartmann's procedure. Median hospital stay was 18 days (range = 12-62). Postoperative morbidity rate was 23.3% (7/30) and included 1 anastomotic leak treated with Hartmann's procedure. Consequently, at discharge from hospital, 23 patients (76.6%) were free of stoma. Primary fascial closure was possible in all patients. Conclusions. DCS with temporary abdominal closure by negative pressure wound therapy combined with instillation in patients with diffuse peritonitis from complicated diverticulitis could represent a feasible surgical option both in hemodynamically stable and no stable patients, showing encouraging results including a low stoma rate and an acceptable morbidity rate.

Wound Healing In Surgery for Trauma (WHIST): statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial comparing standard wound management with negative pressure wound therapy.

BACKGROUND: In the context of major trauma, the rate of wound infection in surgical incisions created during fracture fixation amongst patients with closed high-energy injuries is high. One of the factors which may reduce the risk of surgical site infection is the type of dressing applied over the closed incision. The WHIST trial evaluates the effects of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) compared with standard dressings. METHODS/DESIGN: The WHIST trial is a multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. The primary outcome is the rate of deep surgical site infection at 30 days after major trauma. Secondary outcomes are measured at 3 and 6 months post-randomisation and include the Disability Rating Index, the EuroQoL EQ-5D-5 L, the Doleur Neuropathique Questionnaire, a patient-reported scar assessment, and record of complications. The analysis approaches for the primary and secondary outcomes are described here, as are the descriptive statistics which will be reported. The full WHIST protocol has already been published. DISCUSSION: This paper provides details of the planned statistical analyses for this trial and will reduce the risks of outcome reporting bias and data driven results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials database, ISRCTN12702354 . Registered on 9 December 2015.

Incisional wound VAC and risk-adjusted SSI rates in colorectal surgery: A tertiary centre experience.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal surgery, indications for incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iVAC) remain unclear. We sought to compare rates of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients who received iVAC or standard sterile dressing (SSD). METHODS: Institutional colorectal NSQIP data between 2014 and 2018 was reviewed. SSI rates were compared between iVAC and SSD cohorts using the NSQIP surgical risk calculator (NSQIP SRC) for risk-adjusted analysis. Secondary outcomes included other wound complications, morbidity, mortality, disposition destination and overall length of stay. RESULTS: 145 patients received iVAC while 544 received SSD. SSI was greater in iVAC than SSD (17% vs 9%, p = 0.009). iVAC was independently associated with SSI (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3-3.9). The presence of a colostomy strengthened this relationship. There was no difference in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: iVAC was independently associated with SSI with risk-adjusted analysis. This relationship was stronger in patients with a colostomy.

Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Devices Improve Short-Term Wound Complications, but Not Long-Term Infection Rate Following Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The potential value of incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) on lower extremity total joint arthroplasty (TJA) wound healing has been supported in a few retrospective studies. We performed this prospective, randomized, controlled trial to assess the impact of iNPWT on wound appearance, early complications, and late infection rates following hip and knee TJA compared with a standard surgical dressing. METHODS: Three-hundred ninety-eight patients undergoing primary or revision lower extremity TJA were randomized into iNPWT or conventional wound dressing groups. Wound healing and early complication rates were assessed at 7, 14, and 35 days after the index surgery. Late infection rates were determined at a mean 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Patients treated with an iNPWT device were more likely to report wound drainage at day 7 (P = .01), but less drainage longer than 14 days (P = .04). Wound drainage was significantly higher for total hip arthroplasty patients at day 7 (P = .04), but differences were not sustained through the other time intervals. Total knee arthroplasty patients with a body mass index > 35 kg/m2 treated with an iNPWT device experienced fewer complications (1.3% vs 21.6%, P < .01) and fewer dressing-related concerns (1.3% vs 10.8%, P = .02) compared with a conventional dressing. No significant difference in late superficial or deep infection rates was identified between iNPWT and conventional dressing groups (4.0% vs 3.4%, P = .8). CONCLUSION: Our study findings support improved soft tissue healing response with the use of iNPWT devices. While postoperative wound drainage may limit their value following total hip arthroplasty, incisional NPWT devices may have a targeted benefit for elective total knee arthroplasty patients with a body mass index > 35 kg/m2. Specific study in this higher-risk patient group may be helpful to define the value of iNPWT.

Regional Variation and Trends in the Timing of Lower Extremity Reconstruction: A 10-Year Review of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: The ideal timing of soft-tissue coverage for open lower extremity fractures remains controversial. Using U.S. national data, this study aims to characterize secular trends and regional variation in the timing of soft-tissue coverage. METHODS: Using discharge data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2002 to 2011), the authors identified 888 encounters admitted from the emergency department with isolated open lower extremity fractures treated with pedicled or free tissue transfer. Soft-tissue coverage timing was assessed by patient factors, hospital characteristics, and fracture patterns. Statistical significance and secular trends were analyzed with generalized linear models. RESULTS: The mean day of soft-tissue reconstruction was at 6.64 days. Over the 10-year period, the day of reconstruction increased significantly (from 6.12 days in 2002 to 12.50 days in 2011; coefficient, 0.09; 95 percent CI, 0.05 to 0.12; p < 0.001). Demographic and facility factors did not significantly impact timing. Elixhauser comorbidity scores greater than 2 were associated with later coverage (10.13 days versus 6.29 days; p = 0.001) along with multisite fractures (8.35 days; p = 0.022) and external fixators (8.78 days; p < 0.001). The U.S. Census division showed significant variation in timing ranging from 0.94 days (East North Central) to 9.84 days (Pacific). CONCLUSIONS: A progressive delay in the timing of soft-tissue reconstruction was noted and may be attributed to negative-pressure wound therapy. The timing of soft-tissue coverage varied by region after adjusting for patient and hospital factors. Additional studies are needed to understand the impact of delayed soft-tissue coverage on patient outcomes and health services utilization.

Surgical Endoscopic Vacuum-assisted Closure Therapy (EVAC) in Treating Anastomotic Leakages After Major Resective Surgery of Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure therapy (EVAC) is a promising new technique for repairing upper gastrointestinal defects of different etiologies. As of 2018, however, no standardized recommendation exists. This article reviewed EVAC in treating anastomotic leakage following major resective surgery of esophageal (EC) and gastric cancer (GC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Only English-language literature was investigated. Only studies or data on EC and GC were included. Seven popular search engines (PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, PubFacts) were utilized. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies (17 retrospective, six prospective and six case reports) with a total of 209 patients. Range of anastomotic leakage closure was 66.7-100%. Anastomotic stricture was the most frequent long-term related complication (18 cases). CONCLUSION: EVAC appears to be an extremely useful treatment for postsurgical anastomotic leakage in patients with EC/GC. Almost all kinds of anastomotic leakage (silent to symptomatic, small to large) seem to be amenable to this technique.

Negative pressure wound therapy for treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus (DM) are a common and serious global health issue. People with DM are prone to developing foot ulcers and, if these do not heal, they may also undergo foot amputation surgery resulting in postoperative wounds. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is a technology that is currently used widely in wound care. NPWT involves the application of a wound dressing attached to a vacuum suction machine. A carefully controlled negative pressure (or vacuum) sucks wound and tissue fluid away from the treated area into a canister. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding its use. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of negative pressure wound therapy compared with standard care or other therapies in the treatment of foot wounds in people with DM in any care setting. SEARCH METHODS: In January 2018, for this first update of this review, 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 for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies, reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. We identified six additional studies for inclusion in the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of any brand of NPWT in the treatment of foot wounds in people with DM, irrespective of date or language of publication. Particular effort was made to identify unpublished studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Initial disagreements were resolved by discussion, or by including a third review author when necessary. We presented and analysed data separately for foot ulcers and postoperative wounds. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven RCTs (972 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Study sample sizes ranged from 15 to 341 participants. One study had three arms, which were all included in the review. The remaining 10 studies had two arms. Two studies focused on postamputation wounds and all other studies included foot ulcers in people with DM. Ten studies compared NPWT with dressings; and one study compared NPWT delivered at 75 mmHg with NPWT delivered at 125 mmHg. Our primary outcome measures were the number of wounds healed and time to wound healing.NPWT compared with dressings for postoperative woundsTwo studies (292 participants) compared NPWT with moist wound dressings in postoperative wounds (postamputation wounds). Only one study specified a follow-up time, which was 16 weeks. This study (162 participants) reported an increased number of healed wounds in the NPWT group compared with the dressings group (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 2.01; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision). This study also reported that median time to healing was 21 days shorter with NPWT compared with moist dressings (hazard ratio (HR) calculated by review authors 1.91, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision). Data from the two studies suggest that it is uncertain whether there is a difference between groups in amputation risk (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.02; 292 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for imprecision).NPWT compared with dressings for foot ulcersThere were eight studies (640 participants) in this analysis and follow-up times varied between studies. Six studies (513 participants) reported the proportion of wounds healed and data could be pooled for five studies. Pooled data (486 participants) suggest that NPWT may increase the number of healed wounds compared with dressings (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.72; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision). Three studies assessed time to healing, but only one study reported usable data. This study reported that NPWT reduced the time to healing compared with dressings (hazard ratio (HR) calculated by review authors 1.82, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.60; 341 participants; low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision).Data from three studies (441 participants) suggest that people allocated to NPWT may be at reduced risk of amputation compared with people allocated to dressings (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.70; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence; downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision).Low-pressure compared with high-pressure NPWT for foot ulcersOne study (40 participants) compared NPWT 75 mmHg and NPWT 125 mmHg. Follow-up time was four weeks. There were no data on primary outcomes. There was no clear difference in the number of wounds closed or covered with surgery between groups (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.47; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for serious imprecision) and adverse events (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 8.04; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for serious imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low-certainty evidence to suggest that NPWT, when compared with wound dressings, may increase the proportion of wounds healed and reduce the time to healing for postoperative foot wounds and ulcers of the foot in people with DM. For the comparisons of different pressures of NPWT for treating foot ulcers in people with DM, it is uncertain whether there is a difference in the number of wounds closed or covered with surgery, and adverse events. None of the included studies provided evidence on time to closure or coverage surgery, health-related quality of life or cost-effectiveness. The limitations in current RCT evidence suggest that further trials are required to reduce uncertainty around decision-making regarding the use of NPWT to treat foot wounds in people with DM.

The appropriate management algorithm for diabetic foot: A single-center retrospective study over 12 years.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot management is a challenge for reconstructive surgeons because it combines dramatically decreased circulation and chronic infection. The goal of managing this condition is to maximize viable tissue; however, unsatisfactory results, such as extremity amputation, are unavoidable in some cases. For appropriate management, thorough understanding of diabetic foot and the phased approach to its management is needed. The purpose of this study is to introduce an optimal algorithm for diabetic foot management by analyzing cases >12 years. METHODS: A total of 274 patients with diabetic foot at Hanyang University Guri Hospital from 2005 to 2017 were reviewed. The management process was divided into 5 steps: patient evaluation, wound preparation, improving vascularity, surgery and dressing, and rehabilitation. Patient evaluation included a microbial culture, evaluation of vascularity, and an osteomyelitis assessment. During wound preparation, debridement and negative-pressure wound therapy were performed. Vascularity was improved by radiological intervention or surgical method. Surgery and dressing were performed depending on the indications. Rehabilitation was started after complete wound healing. RESULTS: An infection was confirmed in 213 of 263 patients (81.0%). Of 74 cases in which a vascular study was performed, 83.8% showed arterial occlusion. When surgery was performed with complete eradication of the infection in 155 patients, the rate of revision surgery was 20.6%. The revision rate after surgery with a remnant infection of 66 patients was 40.9% (P = .0003). When surgery was performed after successful revascularization for improving blood flow of 47 patients, the rate of revision surgery was 21.3%. In contrast, the revision rate after surgery with unsuccessful or no revascularization of 174 patients was 28.2% (P = .359). CONCLUSION: Diabetic foot is a debilitating disease arising from multifactorial process. As its management is complex, a comprehensive but accessible treatment algorithm is needed for successful results. For this reason, the appropriate algorithm for diabetic foot management introduced in this study is significant.