2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.02.044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does negative pressure wound therapy with irrigation improve clinical outcomes? A randomized clinical trial in patients with diabetic foot infections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
49
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
49
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Only two studies used higher pressures, 300 to 450 mm Hg 16 and 300 to 600 mmHg. 31 Nine studies 12,13,17–19,27–29,31 reported the frequency of dressing changes, all falling between 2 and 4 days (Table 2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Only two studies used higher pressures, 300 to 450 mm Hg 16 and 300 to 600 mmHg. 31 Nine studies 12,13,17–19,27–29,31 reported the frequency of dressing changes, all falling between 2 and 4 days (Table 2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meta-analysis of two randomized controlled trials 19,27 showed no significant difference in length of stay (n = 240; mean difference, −0.81 day; 95 percent CI, −3.44 to 1.82; I² = 0 percent). Four observational studies that compared negativepressure wound therapy with instillation to negative-pressure wound therapy alone investigated length of stay.…”
Section: Length Of Hospital Staymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Recently, in a systematic review, Dehghan et al (3) and Yovera-Aldana et al (4) described that NPWT efficacy is associated with increased granulation tissue formation, a low incidence of amputation, and reduction of wound area and depth. Similarly, Lavery et al (5) compared the efficacy of NPWT+saline irrigation with that of NPWT+polyhexanide-betaine 0.1% irrigation in patients with infected DF, finding that the latter did not demonstrate significant improvements in wound healing relative to saline. In our case, NPWT was applied for four weeks and, then, we proceeded to ambulatory healing for approximately ten months-these periods have been the subject of multiple studies, such as the one described by Węgrzynowski et al (6) , who evaluated NPWT for "extended time" (±4 weeks) in patients with DF and observed a significant decrease of 92% in the risk of amputation compared to that seen in the short-time NPWT group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The role of antibiotic therapy directed to the micro-organism identified by culture is one of the main therapeutic weapons available and, together with surgical debridement, has demonstrated cure rates of up to 72%. However, it is necessary to add further curative strategies such as NPWT, the use of sponges, and, if necessary, after vascular assessment, the coverage of extensive lesions with skin grafts (5,8) .…”
Section: A B C Dmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firstly, the effectiveness of continuous irrigation in NPWT over standard NPWT remains disputed. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared standard NPWT with antiseptic or saline irrigation in complex foot infections and found no significant difference in outcomes [13,14]. Conversely, another RCT reported improved granulation tissue, reduced wound surface area and reduced bacterial load in extremity ulcers in NPWT with saline instillation over standard NPWT [4].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%