Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30548531›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2019

Incisional negative pressure therapy reduces complications and costs in pressure ulcer reconstruction.

Anthony A Papp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Direct metagenomics investigation of non-surgical hard-to-heal wounds: a review.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Negative pressure wound therapy for treating pressure ulcers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

1 author.

Anthony A PappVancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complications after pressure ulcer reconstruction are common. A complication rate of 21% to 58% and a 27% wound recurrence has been reported. The aim of this study was to decrease postoperative wound-healing complications with incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) postoperatively. This was a prospective non-randomised trial with a historic control. Surgically treated pressure ulcer patients receiving iNPWT were included in the prospective part of the study (Treatment group) and compared with the historic patient cohort of all consecutive surgically treated pressure ulcer patients during a 2-year period preceding the initiation of iNPWT (Control). There were 24 patients in the Control and 37 in the Treatment groups. The demographics between groups were similar. There was a 74% reduction in in-hospital complications in the Treatment group (10.8% vs 41.7%, P = 0.0051), 27% reduction in the length of stay (24.8 vs 33.8 days, P = 0.0103), and a 78% reduction in the number of open wounds at 3 months (5.4 vs 25%, P = -0.0481). Recurrent wounds and history of previous surgery were risk factors for complications. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy shortens hospital stay, number of postoperative complications, and the number of recurrent open wounds at 3 months after reconstructive pressure ulcer surgery, resulting in significant cost savings.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCost SavingsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyPlastic Surgery ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsPressure UlcerProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSurgical Wound InfectionWound Healingcostflapnegative pressurepressure ulcerreconstruction

Identifiers

PMID30548531
PMCPMC7948904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.