ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2026
Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy and wet-to-dry dressing after fasciotomy in earthquake victims: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with traditional wet-to-dry dressings in patients undergoing fasciotomy for acute compartment syndrome of the lower extremities following the February 6, 2023 earthquakes in Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 28 patients (15 males, 13 females) admitted to our hospital between February 6 and March 6, 2023, who underwent fasciotomy for lower extremity acute compartment syndrome. A total of 109 fasciotomy incisions were performed across 60 extremities. Of these, 78 wounds were managed with NPWT and 31 with wet-to-dry dressings. Group allocation was determined by NPWT device availability during the disaster period. All patients were managed using a standardized wound closure protocol, including serial debridement followed by primary closure or split-thickness skin grafting when indicated. Outcomes compared between groups included number of debridements, infection rate, primary wound closure, graft requirement, dressing-related complications, and length of hospital stay.
resultsThe NPWT group required significantly fewer debridements (p<0.05). Dressing-related complications and the need for additional dressing interventions were significantly higher in the wet-to-dry group (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups in infection rate, primary wound closure, graft requirement, or length of hospital stay (p>0.05). Among pediatric patients, infection rates were lower than in adults, whereas unplanned dressing changes were significantly more frequent (p<0.05).
conclusionNPWT is an effective wound management modality in fasciotomy patients, even under disaster conditions. It significantly reduced the need for debridement and dressing-related complications compared to traditional methods, despite similar outcomes in infection and wound closure. These findings support the preferential use of NPWT in mass-casualty settings, where healthcare personnel and resources may be limited. In addition to its clinical benefits, NPWT offers logistical advantages by simplifying wound care and reducing healthcare workload. Future prospective, randomized, multicenter studies are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate the broader applicability and cost-effectiveness of NPWT in both disaster and routine clinical settings.
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.