Annals of surgery · 2020
Meta-analysis, Meta-regression, and GRADE Assessment of Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies of Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Versus Control Dressings for the Prevention of Postoperative Wound Complications.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zwanenburg Pieter R, Tol Berend T, Obdeijn Miryam C, Lapid Oren, Gans Sarah L, Boermeester Marja A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of iNPWT for the prevention of postoperative wound complications such as SSI.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The 2016 WHO recommendation on the use of iNPWT for the prevention of SSI is based on low-level evidence, and many trials have been published since. Preclinical evidence suggests that iNPWT may also prevent wound dehiscence, skin necrosis, seroma, and hematoma.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized and nonrandomized studies that compared iNPWT with control dressings. The evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: High level evidence indicated that iNPWT reduced SSI [28 RCTs, n = 4398, relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.76, P < 0.0001, I = 27%] with a number needed to treat of 19. Low level evidence indicated that iNPWT reduced wound dehiscence (16 RCTs, n = 3058, RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.94). Very low-level evidence indicated that iNPWT also reduced skin necrosis (RR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.33-0.74), seroma (RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.32-0.59), and length of stay (pooled mean difference -2.01, 95% CI: -2.99 to 1.14).
CONCLUSIONS: High-level evidence indicates that incisional iNPWT reduces the risk of SSI with limited heterogeneity. Low to very low-level evidence indicates that iNPWT also reduces the risk of wound dehiscence, skin necrosis, and seroma.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The 2016 WHO recommendation on the use of iNPWT for the prevention of SSI is based on low-level evidence, and many trials have been published since. Preclinical evidence suggests that iNPWT may also prevent wound dehiscence, skin necrosis, seroma, and hematoma.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized and nonrandomized studies that compared iNPWT with control dressings. The evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and GRADE. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: High level evidence indicated that iNPWT reduced SSI [28 RCTs, n = 4398, relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.76, P < 0.0001, I = 27%] with a number needed to treat of 19. Low level evidence indicated that iNPWT reduced wound dehiscence (16 RCTs, n = 3058, RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.94). Very low-level evidence indicated that iNPWT also reduced skin necrosis (RR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.33-0.74), seroma (RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.32-0.59), and length of stay (pooled mean difference -2.01, 95% CI: -2.99 to 1.14).
CONCLUSIONS: High-level evidence indicates that incisional iNPWT reduces the risk of SSI with limited heterogeneity. Low to very low-level evidence indicates that iNPWT also reduces the risk of wound dehiscence, skin necrosis, and seroma.