Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of 3-Day Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Closed Abdominal Incisions in the Prevention of Wound Complications: A Randomized Controlled Trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Abstract

Objective

To determine the impact of negative pressure wound therapy of closed abdominal incisions on wound complications.

Background

Surgical wound complications including surgical site infection complicating open abdominal operations are a burden on the economy. The outcomes of SSI include prolonged hospital stays, adjuvant treatment delay, and incisional hernias leading to a decrease in the quality of life. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy has recently been tried with promising results.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial involving 140 patients post-laparotomy with primary wound closure was divided into 2 groups (70 patients each). For the first group, NPWT dressings were applied for the first 3 days and then conventional dressings for 4 days after. For the second group, conventional dressings were applied for 7 days. Patients were followed up for SSI, seroma, wound dehiscence, and hospital stay.

Results

pNPWT was associated with a significantly lower rate of SSI development compared with gauze dressings (3/70 vs. 17/70) (p = 0.001). It also had a significant effect on lowering the incidence of seroma (0/70 vs. 7/70) (p = 0.007) and delayed wound healing (0/70 vs. 8/70) (p = 0.006) and on decreasing days of hospital stay (2.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.5 ± 1.8) (p <0.00001). No significant difference was observed with regard to hematoma (0/70 vs. 1/70) (p = 0.5) or wound dehiscence (0/70 vs. 2/70) (p = 0.5). No burst abdomens or NPWT complications were recorded in our study.

Conclusion

Three-day NPWT applied to primarily closed incisions is effective in reducing the incidence of SSI, seroma, and delayed wound healing in abdominal operations compared to conventional gauze dressings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data will be available upon the editor’s request.

References

  1. Wick EC, Vogel JD, Church JM, Remzi F, Fazio VW. Surgical site infections in a “high outlier” institution: are colorectal surgeons to blame? Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52(3):374-379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gheorghe A, Moran G, Duffy H, Roberts T, Pinkney T, Calvert M. Health utility values associated with surgical site infection: a systematic review. Value Health. 2015;18(8):1126-1137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Murray BW, Cipher DJ, Pham T, Anthony T. The impact of surgical site infection on the development of incisional hernia and small bowel obstruction in colorectal surgery. Am J Surg. 2011;202(5):558-560.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Anthony T, Murray BW, Sum-Ping JT, et al. Evaluating an evidence-based bundle for preventing surgical site infection: a randomized trial. Arch Surg. 2011;146(3):263-269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Norman G, Shi C, Goh EL, Murphy EM, Reid A, Chiverton L, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2022;2022(4):CD009261.

  6. Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surgery. 2017;152(8):784.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bath MF, Davies J, Suresh R, Machesney MR. Surgical site infections: A scoping review on current intraoperative prevention measures. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2022;104(8):571–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Galal I, El-Hindawy K. Impact of using triclosan-antibacterial sutures on incidence of surgical site infection. The American Journal of Surgery. 2011;202(2):133–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Meyer J, Roos E, Abbassi Z, Buchs NC, Ris F, Toso C. Prophylactic negative-pressure wound therapy prevents surgical site infection in abdominal surgery: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2020;73(11):e3804-e3813.

  10. Lakhani A, Jamel W, Riddiough GE, Cabalag CS, Stevens S, Liu DS. Prophylactic negative pressure wound dressings reduces wound complications following emergency laparotomies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery. 2022;172(3):949–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Boland PA, Kelly ME, Donlon NE, Bolger JC, Mehigan BJ, McCormick PH, et al. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy for closed laparotomy wounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -). 2020;190(1):261–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li P-Y, Yang D, Liu D, Sun S-J, Zhang L-Y. Reducing surgical site infection with negative-pressure wound therapy after open abdominal surgery: A prospective randomized controlled study. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery. 2016;106(3):189–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Murphy PB, Knowles S, Chadi SA, Vogt K, Brackstone M, Koughnett JA, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy use to decrease surgical nosocomial events in colorectal resections (Neptune). Annals of Surgery. 2019;270(1):38–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Leary DP, Peirce C, Anglim B, Burton M, Concannon E, Carter M, et al. Prophylactic negative pressure dressing use in closed laparotomy wounds following abdominal operations. Annals of Surgery. 2017;265(6):1082–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Javed AA, Teinor J, Wright M, Ding D, Burkhart RA, Hundt J, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical-site infections. Annals of Surgery. 2019;269(6):1034–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zaidi A, El-Masry S. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in high-risk general surgery patients following laparotomy: A retrospective study. Colorectal Disease. 2017;19(3):283–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Blackham AU, Farrah JP, McCoy TP, Schmidt BS, Shen P. Prevention of surgical site infections in high-risk patients with laparotomy incisions using negative-pressure therapy. The American Journal of Surgery. 2013;205(6):647–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lozano-Balderas G, Ruiz-Velasco-Santacruz A, Diaz-Elizondo JA, Gomez-Navarro JA, Flores-Villalba E. Surgical site infection rate drops to 0% using a vacuum-assisted closure in contaminated/ dirty infected laparotomy wounds. The American Surgeon. 2017;83(5):512–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shen P, Blackham AU, Lewis S, Clark CJ, Howerton R, Mogal HD, et al. Phase II randomized trial of negative-pressure wound therapy to decrease surgical site infection in patients undergoing laparotomy for gastrointestinal, pancreatic, and peritoneal surface malignancies. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2017;224(4):726–37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Flynn J, Choy A, Leavy K, Connolly L, Alards K, Ranasinha S, et al. Negative pressure dressings (picotm) on laparotomy wounds do not reduce risk of surgical site infection. Surgical Infections. 2020;21(3):231–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Andrianello S, Landoni L, Bortolato C, Iudici L, Tuveri M, Pea A, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for prevention of surgical site infection in patients at high risk after clean-contaminated major pancreatic resections: A single-center, phase 3, Randomized Clinical Trial. Surgery. 2021;169(5):1069–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Leitao MM, Zhou Q, Schiavone MB, Cowan RA, Smith E, Iasonos A, et al. A phase 3 randomized controlled trial of preventive negative pressure wound therapy in postoperative incision management. Gynecologic Oncology. 2020;159:53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kuncewitch MP, Blackham AU, Clark CJ, Dodson RM, Russell GB, Levine EA, et al. Effect of negative pressure wound therapy on wound complications post-pancreatectomy. The American Surgeon. 2019;85(1):1–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Borejsza-Wysocki M, Bobkiewicz A, Francuzik W, Krokowicz L, Walczak D, Szmeja J, et al. Effect of closed incision negative pressure wound therapy on incidence rate of surgical site infection after stoma reversal: A pilot study. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques. 2021;16(4):686–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Wierdak M, Pisarska-Adamczyk M, Wysocki M, Major P, Kołodziejska K, Nowakowski M, et al. Prophylactic negative-pressure wound therapy after ILEOSTOMY reversal for the prevention of wound healing complications in colorectal cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial. Techniques in Coloproctology. 2020;25(2):185–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Martin RCG, O’Neill CH. Negative-pressure therapy for hepatectomy and pancreatectomy: A randomized trial for surgical site Infection Prevention. HPB. 2019;21:S26 - S27.

  27. Ali Gök M, Tolga Kafadar M, Fatih Yeğen S. Comparison of negative-pressure incision management system in wound dehiscence: A prospective, randomized, observational study. Journal of Medicine and Life. 2019;12(3):276–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brennfleck FW, Linsenmeier L, Junger HHG, Schmidt KM, Werner JM, Woehl D, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) on closed incisions to prevent surgical site infection in high-risk patients in HEPATOPANCREATOBILIARY surgery: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial—the NP-SSI trial. Trials. 2020;21(1):918.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

    Albraa Mohamed AbdelDayem, George Abdelfady Nashed, Hany Armia Balamoun & Mohamed Saber Mostafa

Authors
  1. Albraa Mohamed AbdelDayem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George Abdelfady Nashed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hany Armia Balamoun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohamed Saber Mostafa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Albraa Mohamed AbdelDayem.

Ethics declarations

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

AbdelDayem, A.M., Nashed, G.A., Balamoun, H.A. et al. Effectiveness of 3-Day Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Closed Abdominal Incisions in the Prevention of Wound Complications: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Gastrointest Surg 27, 1702–1709 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-023-05752-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-023-05752-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation