ABSTRACT
Background: The aim of this pilot study is to obtain preliminary results comparing topical oxygen therapy (TOT) and vacuum assisted closure (VAC) in terms of its ability to accelerate wound healing. Methods: This non-randomised prospective study included patients with age 16-50 years, wound size ≥ 16cm2 and present below knee joint within seven days of occurrence. Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool (BWAT) was used for evaluation at 8-day interval along with percent area reduction at final follow up. Results: Mean number of cycles required in VAC and TOT group were 1.97 (range 1-3) and 2.1 (range 1-3) (each cycle of 5 days) per patient respectively. Percent area reduction was significantly higher in the VAC group (34±9.7%) than TOT (11.3±3.8%) group at final follow up (p<0.05). TOT patients had better improvement in epithelialization compared to VAC at last follow up. More extensive debridement was needed in patients of TOT than VAC. There was no significant difference between final score in both groups. Conclusions: TOT appears to be comparable to well-established VAC in treatment of fresh traumatic wounds below the knee joint. Further large scale, multicentric and randomised studies comparing both these modalities of treatment should be the way forward.
Subject(s)
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy , Humans , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/methods , Debridement/methods , Prospective Studies , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Pilot Projects , Wound Healing , Surgical Wound Infection , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The aim of this pilot study is to obtain preliminary results comparing topical oxygen therapy (TOT) and vacuum assisted closure (VAC) in terms of its ability to accelerate wound healing. METHODS: This non-randomised prospective study included patients with age 16-50 years, wound size ≥ 16cm2 and present below knee joint within seven days of occurrence. Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool (BWAT) was used for evaluation at 8-day interval along with percent area reduction at final follow up. RESULTS: Mean number of cycles required in VAC and TOT group were 1.97 (range 1-3) and 2.1 (range 1-3) (each cycle of 5 days) per patient respectively. Percent area reduction was significantly higher in the VAC group (34±9.7%) than TOT (11.3±3.8%) group at final follow up (p<0.05). TOT patients had better improvement in epithelialization compared to VAC at last follow up. More extensive debridement was needed in patients of TOT than VAC. There was no significant difference between final score in both groups. CONCLUSION: TOT appears to be comparable to well-established VAC in treatment of fresh traumatic wounds below the knee joint. Further large scale, multicentric and randomised studies comparing both these modalities of treatment should be the way forward