Department of Operation Room, The First People's Hospital of Wenling, Wenling, China.
Ambulatory Surgery Center, Wuhan Children's Hospital Affiliated to Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, (Wuhan Maternal and Children's Healthcare Center), Wuhan, China.
Int Wound J. 2022 Oct;19(6):1319-1328. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13726. Epub 2021 Dec 2.
We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of negative pressure wound therapy compared with conventional wound dressings on closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery. A systematic literature search up to October 2021 was done and 12 studies included 3555 subjects with closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery at the start of the study: 1833 of them were provided with negative pressure wound therapy and 1722 were conventional wound dressings. They were reporting relationships about the effect of negative pressure wound therapy compared with conventional wound dressings on closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the effect of negative pressure wound therapy compared with conventional wound dressings on closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery using the dichotomous and continuous methods with a random or fixed-effect model. Negative pressure wound therapy had significantly lower deep surgical site infection (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.88, P = .005), superficial surgical site infection (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49, P = .31), and wound dehiscence (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.80, P = .009) compared with conventional wound dressings in subjects with closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery. However, negative pressure wound therapy had no significant effect on the length of hospital stay (MD, 0.29; 95% CI, -2.00- 2.58, P = .80) compared with conventional wound dressings in subjects with closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Negative pressure wound therapy had significantly lower deep surgical site infection, superficial surgical site infection, and wound dehiscence; however, negative pressure wound therapy had no beneficial effect on the length of hospital stay compared with conventional wound dressings in subjects with closed incisions in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Further studies are required to validate these findings.
我们进行了一项荟萃分析，以评估负压伤口治疗与传统伤口敷料相比在骨科创伤手术闭合切口的效果。系统文献检索截至 2021 年 10 月，共纳入 12 项研究，共纳入 3555 例骨科创伤手术闭合切口患者：其中 1833 例接受负压伤口治疗，1722 例接受传统伤口敷料。他们报告了与负压伤口治疗与传统伤口敷料相比在骨科创伤手术闭合切口的效果相关的关系。我们使用二分类和连续方法，以随机或固定效应模型，计算比值比（OR）和均数差（MD）及其 95%置信区间（CI），以评估负压伤口治疗与传统伤口敷料相比在骨科创伤手术闭合切口的效果。与传统伤口敷料相比，负压伤口治疗在骨科创伤手术闭合切口患者中，深度手术部位感染（OR，0.65；95%CI，0.48-0.88，P = 0.005）、浅部手术部位感染（OR，0.23；95%CI，0.11-0.49，P = 0.31）和伤口裂开（OR，0.41；95%CI，0.21-0.80，P = 0.009）的发生率显著降低。然而，与传统伤口敷料相比，负压伤口治疗对骨科创伤手术闭合切口患者的住院时间（MD，0.29；95%CI，-2.00-2.58，P = 0.80）无显著影响。与传统伤口敷料相比，负压伤口治疗在骨科创伤手术闭合切口患者中，深度手术部位感染、浅部手术部位感染和伤口裂开的发生率显著降低，但对住院时间无有益影响。需要进一步的研究来验证这些发现。
