Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31667978›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2020

Negative pressure wound therapy with instillation: International consensus guidelines update.

Paul J Kim, Christopher E Attinger, Thomas Constantine, Brett D Crist, Elizabeth Faust, Christoph R Hirche, Lawrence A Lavery, Valerie J Messina, Norihiko Ohura, Laurie J Punch and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors.

Paul J KimDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6186-6890
Christopher E AttingerDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia.
Thomas ConstantineDepartment of Surgery, Toronto Cosmetic Surgery Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Brett D CristDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Missouri Health Care, Columbia, Missouri.
Elizabeth FaustWound, Ostomy, Continence Specialist, Tower Health System, West Reading, Pennsylvania.
Christoph R HircheDepartment of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Klinik für Plastische und Handchirurgie, Universität Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
Lawrence A LaveryDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Valerie J MessinaWound Healing Center, MemorialCare Long Beach Medical Center, Long Beach, California.
Norihiko OhuraDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Kyorin University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Laurie J PunchDepartment of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Garrett A WirthWound Healing Center, MemorialCare Long Beach Medical Center, Long Beach, California.
Ibby YounisDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Royal Free Hospital University College Hospital, London, UK.
Luc TéotDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Montpellier University Hospital, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwell time (NPWTi-d) has gained wider adoption and interest due in part to the increasing complexity of wounds and patient conditions. Best practices for the use of NPWTi-d have shifted in recent years based on a growing body of evidence and expanded worldwide experience with the technology. To better guide the use of NPWTi-d with all dressing and setting configurations, as well as solutions, there is a need to publish updated international consensus guidelines, which were last produced over 6 years ago. An international, multidisciplinary expert panel of clinicians was convened on 22 to 23 February 2019, to assist in developing current recommendations for best practices of the use of NPWTi-d. Principal aims of the meeting were to update recommendations based on panel members' experience and published results regarding topics such as appropriate application settings, topical wound solution selection, and wound and patient characteristics for the use of NPWTi-d with various dressing types. The final consensus recommendations were derived based on greater than 80% agreement among the panellists. The guidelines in this publication represent further refinement of the recommended parameters originally established for the use of NPWTi-d. The authors thank Karen Beach and Ricardo Martinez for their assistance with manuscript preparation.

Indexed as

ConsensusPractice Guidelines as TopicWound HealingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyTherapeutic IrrigationWound InfectionNPWTitopical wound solutionwound bioburdenwound cleansing, V.A.C. Veraflo therapy

Identifiers

PMID31667978
PMCPMC7003930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.