Department of Orthopedics, People's Hospital Affiliated of Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Department of Cardiac Care Unit, People's Hospital Affiliated of Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Int Wound J. 2023 Dec;20(10):4291-4299. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14331. Epub 2023 Aug 3.
The results of this meta-analysis were applied to analyse the effects of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) and conventional dressings on post-surgical outcomes after trauma in orthopaedics. Through June 2023, a full review of the literature has been carried out with the help of 4 databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. The quality of the literature was evaluated according to the classification and exclusion criteria established for this trial, which led to an analysis of 9 related trials. The results included the injury was deeply and superficially infected, and the wound was dehiscence. The 95% confidence interval (CI) and odds ratios (OR) were computed by means of a fixed-effect and a random-effect model. Meta-analyses were conducted with RevMan 5.3. There is no statistical significance between NPWT and routine therapy for deep wound infection (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.82-2.27, p = 0.23); There was no difference in the incidence of inflammation in the wound than with conventional dressings (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.84-1.45, p = 0.49); But NPWT was obviously superior to that of routine therapy in superficial wound infection (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.32-3.25, p = 0.002) and wound dehiscence (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.31-4.57, p = 0.005); But not with respect to wound exudate. therapy group, but no statistically significant difference was found with respect to wound exudation. (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.86-1.57, p = 0.34). Given that some of the chosen trials are too small for this meta-analysis, caution should be exercised when treating their values. More high-quality research with a large sample is required in order to confirm the findings.
本荟萃分析的结果用于分析负压伤口治疗(NPWT)和传统敷料对矫形创伤后术后结局的影响。截至 2023 年 6 月,通过 4 个数据库(PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 Web of Science)全面审查了文献。根据为该试验制定的分类和排除标准评估文献质量,导致对 9 项相关试验进行了分析。结果包括损伤为深部和浅部感染,以及伤口裂开。使用固定效应和随机效应模型计算 95%置信区间(CI)和优势比(OR)。使用 RevMan 5.3 进行荟萃分析。NPWT 与常规治疗深伤口感染的差异无统计学意义(OR,1.37;95%CI,0.82-2.27,p=0.23);与常规敷料相比,伤口炎症发生率无差异(OR,1.10;95%CI,0.84-1.45,p=0.49);但 NPWT 在浅部伤口感染(OR,2.07;95%CI,1.32-3.25,p=0.002)和伤口裂开(OR,2.44;95%CI,1.31-4.57,p=0.005)方面明显优于常规治疗;但对伤口渗出物无影响。与常规治疗相比,NPWT 组患者的伤口渗出量无显著差异(OR,1.16;95%CI,0.86-1.57,p=0.34)。由于一些选择的试验对于本次荟萃分析来说规模太小,因此在处理这些值时应谨慎。需要更多高质量的、大样本的研究来验证这些发现。