ReviewJPRAS open2026
Negative pressure wound therapy in infants with complex abdominal wounds: A systematic review of clinical applications and closure strategies.
Review in JPRAS open, 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
Background: Literature supporting negative pressure wound therapy use for complex abdominal wounds in infants consists mostly of case studies and small retrospective series. Its applications, treatment protocols, and reported outcomes in infants remain poorly characterized. This systematic review describes the use of negative pressure wound therapy in infants with complex abdominal wounds, with emphasis on treatment protocols and closure strategies. Methods: This systematic review identified studies reporting negative pressure wound therapy use on abdominal wounds in children younger than 12 months according to PRISMA guidelines. Extracted data included patient characteristics, indications for use, negative pressure wound therapy protocols, therapy duration, definitive closure method, and patient outcomes. Results: Of 202 publications, 38 met all inclusion criteria, representing 226 infants, of whom 161 received abdominal negative pressure wound therapy. Among 112 infants with open abdominal wounds, the definitive closure strategy was reported for 110. Fifty-two (47%) achieved closure by secondary intention and 58 (53%) underwent delayed primary (tertiary) closure. Among 108 infants with explicitly reported reconstructive outcomes, graft- or flap-based reconstruction was reported in four (3.7%). Treatment protocols and outcome reporting varied across studies. Conclusions: Published reports describe NPWT as an adjunct in the management of complex abdominal wounds in infants across a range of indications and closure strategies. However, the evidence consists predominantly of case reports and small retrospective series with heterogeneous protocols, incomplete outcome reporting, and substantial risk of selection and publication bias. These data provide a descriptive summary of reported clinical practice but do not establish whether NPWT improves closure outcomes or reduces the need for reconstructive procedures.
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.