Suppr超能文献

经腹股沟切口的闭合式切口负压治疗(ciNPT)在血管外科减少手术部位感染(SSI)风险的临床相关性。

Clinical Relevance of Closed-Incision Negative Pressure Therapy (ciNPT) for SSI-Risk Reduction in Vascular Surgery Through a Groin Incision.

机构信息

Department of Vascular Surgery, Hagaziekenhuis, Els Borst-Eilersplein 275, 2455AA, The Hague, The Netherlands.

Wound Expertise Center, Hagaziekenhuis, Els Borst-Eilersplein 275, 2455AA, The Hague, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Ann Vasc Surg. 2022 Jan;78:93-102. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.06.035. Epub 2021 Sep 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Vascular surgery, especially lower limb revascularization surgery, has one of the highest rates of surgical complications, predominantly surgical site infections (SSI). Resulting in a significant burden of additional costs due to longer hospital stays, re-admissions and re-interventions, mainly attributable to deep incisional SSIs. Closed incisional negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) is a relatively new strategy in the postoperative management surgical wounds, aiming to reduce surgical wound complications. When discussing the clinical relevance of ciNPT, it is crucial to take into account the outcome of therapy as well as the additional costs related to ciNPT. Since, the additional costs must be justified by an associated decrease in the morbidity and costs associated with groin wound complications, which are particularly attributable to deep incisional SSIs. The current literature evaluating the beneficial effect of ciNPT in groin incisional vascular surgery, predominantly focusses on the decrease in superficial SSIs. Whereas this study aims to address and discuss the clinical relevance of ciNPT over conventional wound dressings, by separately evaluating and comparing the incidence of superficial and deep SSIs and their related re-admissions and re-interventions.

METHODS

In this single center prospective cohort study performed in a non-academic hospital in The Netherlands, 59 consecutive patients (67 incisions) were included between January and October 2019. All underwent elective vascular surgery with groin (access) incisions for either lower limb revascularization surgery or abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. The study group was treated with six days ciNPT (PREVENA Incision Management System; KCI/3M, San Antonio, TX, USA) and matched for equal comparison to a historical retrospectively analysed cohort of 54 consecutive patients (60 incisions), all of whom have undergone elective vascular surgery for equal indications with groin (access) incisions in our center between January and October 2018. The standard-care group was treated following standard surgical wound care protocol with conventional surgical self-adhesive plaster (10 × 15cm, Mepore, Mölnlycke Health Care AB, Gothenburg, Sweden).

RESULTS

Study groups were comparable at baseline, except for Body Mass Index (BMI), which was significantly higher in the ciNPT-group (P =.021). No significant differences for formation of seroma, hematoma, as well as wound dehiscence and SSIs were found between both groups. Groin SSIs were seen in 12.1% of the patients in the ciNPT-group and in 13.0% in the Standard-care group (OR 0.80, CI ((0.26, 2.48)), deep SSI contributed for 4 out of 7 patients of total SSIs in the ciNPT-group and for 2 out of 7 patients in the standard of care group (P-value >0.05). Analysis for incidence of hospital re-admission and re-intervention in both study groups showed no significant difference. Subset analysis in both study groups for SSIs differentiated in superficial and deep SSIs showed that only deep SSIs resulted in re-interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings in the population of our single center study, we conclude that routine use of ciNPT was not effective in reducing groin wound complications, and therefore could not replicate the promising findings from some previous studies. Furthermore, we did not find a reduction in the incidence of deep SSIs, which comprise the highest morbidity and costs. Considering our findings as well as the associated additional expenses related to ciNPT, it might be superfluous at this stage to use ciNPT as the new standard of post-operative groin incision care for all lower limb revascularization and abdominal aortic aneurysm surgeries. In our opinion further research is warranted for establishing a risk-factor based model for determination of the indication of ciNPT. To be able to achieve a more substantiated decision for utilizing ciNPT compared to standard surgical wound care in groin incisional vascular surgical interventions.

摘要

背景

血管外科,特别是下肢血运重建手术,其手术并发症发生率最高,主要为手术部位感染(SSI)。由于住院时间延长、再次入院和再次干预,主要归因于深部切口 SSI,导致额外的成本负担显著增加。闭合切口负压治疗(ciNPT)是一种用于术后管理手术伤口的相对较新策略,旨在减少手术伤口并发症。在讨论 ciNPT 的临床相关性时,必须考虑治疗结果以及与 ciNPT 相关的额外成本。由于必须通过与腹股沟伤口并发症相关的发病率和成本降低来证明额外成本的合理性,这些并发症特别归因于深部切口 SSI。目前评估 ciNPT 在腹股沟血管手术中的有益效果的文献主要集中在减少浅表 SSI 上。而本研究旨在通过单独评估和比较浅表和深部 SSI 及其相关再次入院和再次干预的发生率,来解决和讨论 ciNPT 相对于传统伤口敷料的临床相关性。

方法

本研究为在荷兰一家非学术医院进行的单中心前瞻性队列研究,2019 年 1 月至 10 月期间纳入 59 例连续患者(67 个切口)。所有患者均接受腹股沟(入路)切口的选择性血管手术,用于下肢血运重建手术或腹主动脉瘤手术。研究组接受六天 ciNPT(PREVENA 切口管理系统;KCI/3M,圣安东尼奥,TX,美国)治疗,并与我们中心 2018 年 1 月至 10 月期间接受相同适应证的腹股沟(入路)切口选择性血管手术的 54 例连续患者(60 个切口)的历史回顾性分析队列进行了同等比较。标准护理组按照标准手术伤口护理方案接受治疗,使用传统的手术自粘膏(10×15cm,Mepore,Mölnlycke Health Care AB,哥德堡,瑞典)。

结果

研究组在基线时具有可比性,除了体重指数(BMI)外,ciNPT 组明显更高(P=.021)。两组之间在血清肿、血肿形成以及伤口裂开和 SSI 方面没有发现显著差异。ciNPT 组中 12.1%的患者发生腹股沟 SSI,标准护理组中 13.0%的患者发生(OR 0.80,CI(0.26,2.48)),ciNPT 组的 7 例总 SSI 中有 4 例为深部 SSI,标准护理组的 7 例中有 2 例为深部 SSI(P 值>0.05)。对两组患者的住院再入院和再干预发生率进行分析,无显著差异。在两组患者的 SSI 亚组分析中,将浅表 SSI 和深部 SSI 区分开来,结果仅深部 SSI 导致了再干预。

结论

基于我们单中心研究人群的发现,我们得出结论,常规使用 ciNPT 并不能有效降低腹股沟伤口并发症,因此无法复制一些先前研究的有希望的结果。此外,我们没有发现深部 SSI 的发生率降低,深部 SSI 构成了最高的发病率和成本。考虑到我们的发现以及与 ciNPT 相关的额外费用,现阶段在所有下肢血运重建和腹主动脉瘤手术中,将 ciNPT 用作腹股沟切口术后护理的新标准可能有些多余。我们认为有必要进行进一步的研究,以建立基于风险因素的模型,确定 ciNPT 的适应证。以便在腹股沟切口血管外科干预中,与标准手术伤口护理相比,能够更有依据地决定使用 ciNPT。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验