1. Negative Pressure Dressings (PICO TM ) on Laparotomy Wounds Do Not Reduce Risk of Surgical Site Infection.
- Author
-
Flynn J, Choy A, Leavy K, Connolly L, Alards K, Ranasinha S, and Tan PY
- Subjects
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anastomosis, Surgical methods, Colectomy methods, Colostomy methods, Comorbidity, Diabetes Mellitus epidemiology, Female, Humans, Intestinal Diseases epidemiology, Intestinal Diseases surgery, Intestinal Neoplasms epidemiology, Laparotomy methods, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity epidemiology, Proctectomy methods, Digestive System Surgical Procedures methods, Intestinal Neoplasms surgery, Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy methods, Surgical Wound therapy, Surgical Wound Infection prevention & control
- Abstract
Background: Surgical site infection is a common cause of post-operative morbidity. Although a number of studies on negative pressure dressings including PICO
TM (Smith & Nephew, St. Petersburg, PL) have shown reduced rates of surgical site infections (SSI), more evidence is required. This study sought to determine if PICO dressings reduce surgical site infections or other surgical site complications in primarily closed laparotomy incisions after clean-contaminated surgery in moderate-risk patients. Methods: Patients undergoing laparotomy and bowel resection were randomly assigned to PICO or conventional dressings. The incision was assessed one-week post-operatively for any infection. Patient notes including outpatient appointments were later examined for any delayed infection during the same or subsequent admissions or in the outpatient setting. Patient characteristics such as body mass index (BMI), incision depth, and comorbidities were noted to identify any group who may show more benefit from the negative pressure dressings. Results: From March 1, 2015 until September 30, 2017, 217 patients consented to participate in the trial. Twenty-nine were subsequently excluded, leaving 188 patients with 96 receiving PICO and 92 receiving a standard dressing. Twenty-seven (14%) patients developed a surgical site infection; 13 received a PICO dressing and 14 received standard dressing (p = 0.73), indicating no difference in surgical site infections between the two types of dressing (odds ratio [OR] 1.1). Thirty-one (16.5%) patients developed other surgical site complications. Eleven of these patients received a PICO dressing and 20 received the standard dressing (p = 0.06, OR 2.1). Conclusion: This study does not support the routine use of PICO dressings on uncomplicated laparotomy incisions in moderate-risk patients.- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF