Surgical infections · 2018
Efficacy of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy for Preventing Surgical Site Infections after Surgery for Peritonitis Attributable to Lower-Gastrointestinal Perforation: A Single-Institution Experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Danno Katsuki, Matsuda Chu, Miyazaki Susumu, Komori Takamichi, Nakanishi Megumi, Motoori Masaaki, Kashiwazaki Masaki, Fujitani Kazumasa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: For patients at high risk, such as those with lower-gastrointestinal perforations, it is important to establish a preventive method that reduces the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) significantly. We applied negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) as part of a delayed primary closure approach to prevent SSIs. This study evaluated the value of this technique.
METHODS: We included prospectively 28 patients undergoing abdominal surgery for peritonitis caused by a lower-gastrointestinal perforation between May 2014 and November 2015. Historical controls comprised retrospective data on 19 patients who had undergone primary suturing for managing peritonitis incisions for a lower-gastrointestinal perforation from January to December 2013.
RESULTS: We found a significant association between the SSI incidence and the type of incision management (10.7% with NPWT and delayed closure vs. 63.2% with primary suturing; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in the length of the hospital stay (22 days for NPWT and delayed closure vs. 27 days for primary suturing; p = 0.45). No severe adverse events were observed related to NPWT.
CONCLUSION: The use of NPWT and delayed primary closure was an effective measure for preventing SSI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery for peritonitis caused by lower-gastrointestinal perforation.
METHODS: We included prospectively 28 patients undergoing abdominal surgery for peritonitis caused by a lower-gastrointestinal perforation between May 2014 and November 2015. Historical controls comprised retrospective data on 19 patients who had undergone primary suturing for managing peritonitis incisions for a lower-gastrointestinal perforation from January to December 2013.
RESULTS: We found a significant association between the SSI incidence and the type of incision management (10.7% with NPWT and delayed closure vs. 63.2% with primary suturing; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in the length of the hospital stay (22 days for NPWT and delayed closure vs. 27 days for primary suturing; p = 0.45). No severe adverse events were observed related to NPWT.
CONCLUSION: The use of NPWT and delayed primary closure was an effective measure for preventing SSI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery for peritonitis caused by lower-gastrointestinal perforation.