An international pragmatic randomized controlled trial to compare a single‐use negative‐pressure dressing versus the surgeon’s preference of dressing to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection following emergency laparotomy: the SUNRRISE trial protocol

Wilkin, Richard; Clouston, H.W.; Coe, P O; Johnstone, Elisabeth; Afzali, Hossein Haji Ali; Arthur, Thomas; Brown, James; Dawson, Amanda; Dudi‐Venkata, Nagendra N.; Egoroff, Natasha; Gramlick, Madelyn; Lam, Yick Ho; Muralidharan, Vijayaragavan; Park, Sean S. W.; Pockney, Peter; Richards, Toby; Sammour, Tarik; Stephensen, Bree; Stevens, Sean; Vo, Uyen Giao; Watson, David A.; Coffey, Tony; Cook, Nicola; Duarte, Rui; Duff, Sarah; Fish, Rebecca; Ghaneh, Paula; Glasbey, James; Haycox, Alan; Ives, Natalie; Kaur, Manjinder; Magill, Laura; Mehta, Samir; Pinkney, Thomas; Platt, Kellie; Sehkar, Hema; Sinha, Yash; Stott, M; Waite, Kathryn

doi:10.1111/codi.15474

Colorectal Disease

2021

DOI: 10.1111/codi.15474

|View full text |Cite

An international pragmatic randomized controlled trial to compare a single‐use negative‐pressure dressing versus the surgeon’s preference of dressing to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection following emergency laparotomy: the SUNRRISE trial protocol

Richard Wilkin¹,

H.W. Clouston²,

P O Coe³

et al.

Abstract: Aim: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication following emergency laparotomy, occurring in around 25% of patients in UK practice. The adoption of single-use negative-pressure dressings (SUNPDs) has been proposed as a prophylactic method of reducing the rate of SSI. The primary aim of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) described herein is to determine if a SUNPD reduces SSI at 30 days after an emergency laparotomy. Method:The Single Use Negative pRessure dressing for Reduction In Surgical site … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2021

2022

Publication Types

Select...

Article4

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent3

Authors

Journals

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

Norman

Shi

Goh

et al. 2022

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain. Objectives To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost‐effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure. Search methods In January 2021, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In‐Process & Other Non‐Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting. Selection criteria We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another. Data collection and analysis At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology. Our primary outcomes were SSI, mortality, and wound dehiscence. Main results In this fourth update, we added 18 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one new economic study, resulting in a total of 62 RCTs (13,340 included participants) and six economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in a wide range of surgeries, including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Eleven studies (6384 participants) which reported mortality were pooled. There is low‐certainty evidence showing there may be a reduced risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (0.84%) compared with standard dressings (1.17%) but there is uncertainty around this as confidence intervals include risk of benefits and harm; risk ratio (RR) 0.78 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.30; I 2 = 0%). Fifty‐four studies reported SSI; 44 studies (11,403 participants) were pooled. There is moderate‐certainty evidence that NPWT probably results in fewer SSIs (8.7% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (11.75%) after surgery; RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.85; I 2 = 29%). Thirty studies reported wound dehiscence; 23 studies (8724 participants) were pooled. There is moderate‐certainty evidence that there is probably little or no differe...

show abstract

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

Norman

Shi

Goh

et al. 2022

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Trainee research collaboratives: developing a new culture?

Watson

Tan

2022

ANZ Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaboration in colorectal surgical research

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surgical research has been under‐powered, under‐funded and under‐delivered for decades. A solution may be to form large research collaborations and thereby enable implementation of successful interventional trials as well as robust international observational studies with thousands of patients. There are many such research collaborations in colorectal surgery, and in this paper we have highlighted the experiences from the West Midlands Research Collaborative (WMRC), the Scandinavian Surgical Outcomes Research Group (SSORG) and the European Society of Coloproctology. With active research networks, it is possible to deliver large, high‐quality studies and provide high‐level evidence for solving important clinical questions in an efficient and timely manner.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

An international pragmatic randomized controlled trial to compare a single‐use negative‐pressure dressing versus the surgeon’s preference of dressing to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection following emergency laparotomy: the SUNRRISE trial protocol

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure

Trainee research collaboratives: developing a new culture?

Collaboration in colorectal surgical research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About