Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28885895›Full record

SynthesisSurgical infections2017

Meta-Analysis of Comparative Trials Evaluating a Prophylactic Single-Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System for the Prevention of Surgical Site Complications.

Vicki Strugala, Robin Martin

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical infections, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
15.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03414762 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

PICO Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Obese Women Undergoing Elective Cesarean Delivery.

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorthwell HealthRan2019 to 2022Enrolled153ConditionsCesarean Section Complications, Cesarean Wound, Dehiscence, Cesarean Wound DisruptionArmsPICO Negative Pressure Wound Therapy, Standard Dressing
NCT03716687 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for High Risk Laparotomy Wounds. Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorSt. Borbala HospitalRan2018 to 2020Enrolled100ConditionsSurgical Wound, Wound Dehiscence, Surgical, Surgical Site Infection, Dehiscence of Internal Surgical WoundArmsProphylactic negative pressure wound dressing after laparotomy
NCT06493539 phase1withdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Application of Closed Incision Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the Post-Surgical Management of Lower Extremity Amputations: A Randomized Clinical Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Southern CaliforniaRan2024 to 2025Enrolled0ConditionsWound Heal, Wound DehiscenceArmsStandard of Care group, CINPWT
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 143 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Effectiveness of combined local therapy with antibiotics and fibrin vs. vacuum-assisted wound therapy in soft tissue infections: a retrospective study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vicki StrugalaAdvanced Wound Management, Clinical, Scientific and Medical Affairs , Smith & Nephew plc, Hull, United Kingdom .
Robin MartinAdvanced Wound Management, Clinical, Scientific and Medical Affairs , Smith & Nephew plc, Hull, United Kingdom .
Advanced Medical Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe report the first meta-analysis on the impact of prophylactic use of a specific design of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) device on surgical site complications.

methodsArticles were identified in which the specific single-use NPWT device (PICO

resultsThere were 1863 patients (2202 incisions) represented by 16 articles. Among 10 randomized studies, there was a significant reduction in SSI rate of 51% from 9.7% to 4.8% with NPWT intervention (RR 0.49 [95% CI 0.34-0.69] p < 0.0001). There were six observational studies assessing reduction in SSI rate of 67% from 22.5% to 7.4% with NPWT (RR 0. 32 [95% CI 0.18-0.55] p < 0.0001). Combining all 16 studies, there was a significant reduction in SSI of 58% from 12.5% to 5.2% with NPWT (RR 0.43 [95% CI 0.32-0.57] p < 0.0001). Similar effects were seen irrespective of the kind of surgery (orthopedic, abdominal, colorectal, or cesarean section), although the numbers needed to treat (NNT) were lower in operations with higher frequencies of complications. There was a significant reduction in dehiscence from 17.4% to 12.8% with NPWT (RR 0.71 [95% CI 0.54-0.92] p < 0.01). The mean reduction in hospital LOS by NPWT was also significant (-0.47 days [95% CI -0.71 to -0.23] p < 0.0001).

conclusionsThe significant reduction in SSI, wound dehiscence, and LOS on the basis of pooled data from 16 studies shows a benefit of the PICO single-use NPWT system compared with standard care in closed surgical incisions.

Indexed as

HumansNegative-Pressure Wound TherapySurgical Wound Infectionpostoperative complicationprophylaxissurgical site infectionwound infectionwound management

Identifiers

PMID28885895
PMCPMC5649123
OpenAlexW2750713032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.