SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2026
Effect of Prophylactic Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Surgical Site Infection After Emergency Laparotomy: An Updated Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.
Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 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
introductionPatients undergoing emergency laparotomy are at high risk of surgical site infections (SSI), which contribute substantially to postoperative morbidity. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) has been shown to reduce the incidence of SSI following elective surgery, however, its effectiveness in the emergency setting remains uncertain. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of iNPWT in reducing SSI after emergency laparotomy.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane through November 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing iNPWT to standard dressings after emergency laparotomy. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) were pooled for relevant outcomes with 95% confidence intervals using random-effects and inverse variance weighting. A two-tailed p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Prespecified subgroup analyses restricted to RCTs were performed. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsFifteen studies (6 RCTs and 9 observational) including 3369 patients were analyzed. It was found that iNPWT was associated with significantly lower odds of overall (OR 0.36; p = 0.0003), superficial, and deep SSI, with consistent findings in RCT-only analysis (OR 0.41; p = 0.0221). iNPWT was also associated with lower odds of seroma (OR 0.57; p = 0.0325), with consistent results observed in RCT-only analyses (OR 0.54; p = 0.025). Hospital length of stay was shorter in the iNPWT group (MD -1.49 days; p = 0.04), and iNPWT was associated with lower odds of wound dehiscence (OR 0.47; p = 0.0062), however, these findings were not confirmed in RCT-only analyses. Postoperative complications, classified according to the Clavien-Dindo system, did not differ between groups (OR 0.93; p = 0.4973). Overall mortality was comparable between groups, although iNPWT was associated with higher follow-up mortality. This finding was not confirmed in RCTs.
conclusionIn patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, iNPWT was associated with reduced odds of SSI and wound-related complications compared with standard dressings. Although iNPWT was associated with higher follow-up mortality, this finding was not confirmed in RCT-only analyses.
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.