ReviewCureus2022
Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy vs Standard of Care Dressing in Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and economic impact of incisional negative pressure wound therapy in breast surgery: meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of prophylactic application of negative pressure wound therapy in stopping surgical site wound problems for closed incisions in breast cancer surgery: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Closed-Incision Negative Pressure Therapy: Scoping Review and Multidisciplinary Consensus Recommendations of the Spanish Observatory of Infection in Surgery.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Salvage of Nipple-areolar Complex Venous Congestion Following Reduction Mammaplasty with Full-coverage Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy.Journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Influence of Closed-incision Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Abdominal Site Complications in Autologous Breast Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The implementation of closed incision negative pressure therapy (CINPT) is widely seen in many surgical subspecialties including orthopaedics, vascular surgery, and abdominal surgery. However, research on its use in breast surgery is still in its infancy. We conducted a systematic review on the use of CINPT vs standard of care dressings (SOC) in wound management of post-operative breast surgery. A literature search was conducted on PubMed, MedLine, and Google Scholar for studies that compared CINPT against SOC. Seven studies were included in this systematic review. The results of our systematic review have shown that CINPT has a positive outcome in reducing post-operative wound complication rates as compared to SOC dressings (commonly Steri-Strips and waterproof dressings), which was 1-8% vs 1-30% in CINPT and SOC, respectively. Furthermore, CINPT has the potential to confer additional cost-savings of up to USD218 per patient for a health institution with regards to reduced complications rates that might have required extended management. The use of CINPT in breast surgery remains highly promising. It has many advantages over SOC, including better wound outcomes and added cost savings. Further studies are required to delineate the potential benefits in different sub-sets of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.