Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36648534›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2023

Does the use of epicutaneous vacuum-assisted closure after revision surgery on the spine reduce further wound revision surgery?

Stefan Gläsel, Jan-Sven Jarvers, Philipp Pieroh, Christoph-Eckhard Heyde, Ulrich J Spiegl

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stefan GläselDepartment of Spine Surgery and Neurotraumatology, Sana Klinikum Borna, Borna, Germany.
Jan-Sven JarversDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Philipp PierohDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Christoph-Eckhard HeydeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Ulrich J SpieglDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. uli.spiegl@gmx.de.ORCID 0000-0002-5179-4192
Sana Klinikum · DEUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to investigate the effect of epicutaneous vacuum therapy on the rate of unplanned spinal wound revisions compared with conventional wound dressing.

methodsThis retrospective study included patients who underwent unplanned revision spine surgery after primary aseptic spine surgery who were treated at a level I spine centre between December 2011 and December 2019. Patients with revision surgery who required a further unplanned revision surgery during the inpatient stay were considered a treatment failure. The epicutaneous vacuum-assisted closure (Epi-VAC) therapy was the standard treatment method beginning in 2017 (the epi-VAC group). Before, conventional wound dressing was used (the control group (CG)). In addition, a one-to-one matched-pair comparison analysis was performed between both groups.

resultsOf 218 patients, 48 were in the epi-VAC group. The mean age was 65.1 years (epi-VAC 68.2 to CG 64.3 years (P = 0.085)), and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.2 kg/m

conclusionConcerning repeat unplanned wound revision after spinal revision surgery, we cannot demonstrate an advantage of the epicutaneous vacuum therapy over conventional wound dressing.

Indexed as

Negative-Pressure Wound TherapyAgedHumansMiddle AgedReoperationRetrospective StudiesSpineSurgical Wound InfectionTreatment OutcomeEpicutaneous vacuum therapySurgical site infectionWound revision surgery

Identifiers

PMID36648534
PMCPMC9931821
OpenAlexW4316810837

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.