Search

Purpose: Surgical site infections (SSIs) following spine surgery are associated with morbidity and resource utilization. Applying prophylactic closed-incisional negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) during posterior instrumented fusion has mixed results in reducing rates of wound complications and SSI. We evaluated the clinical efficacy and potential cost-savings associated with ciNPWT in high-risk patients receiving posterior instrumented spinal fusion., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients receiving posterior instrumented spinal fusion for any surgical indication between July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019, and compared rates of wound dehiscence, SSI, and reoperation for wound complications between standard surgical dressings and ciNPWT. Surgical dressing selection was based on the senior author's assessment of infection risk factors., Results: A total of 229 patients (n = 85 standard surgical dressings, n = 144 ciNPWT) were included. The ciNPWT group had significantly more risk factors for wound-related complications, including older age (61.8 vs. 58.5 years, p = 0.042), diabetes mellitus (36.8% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.037), more instrumented levels (5.6 vs. 3.9, p < 0.0001), estimated blood loss (1298 vs. 998 mL, p = 0.036), and deformity was the predominant operative indication (29.9% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.040). Prophylactic ciNPWT was associated with significantly lower rates of wound dehiscence (21.5% vs. 34.1%, p = 0.036) and SSI (8.3% vs. 21.2%, p = 0.005). Number needed to treat with ciNPWT to prevent one SSI was 8 patients. The cost of preventing one SSI was $4,560. Cost-benefit analysis demonstrated a potential mean savings of $21,662 per operative SSI prevented and $270,775 per 100 patients undergoing posterior instrumented fusion with ciNPWT., Conclusions: Prophylactic ciNPWT use is a cost-effective means of reducing rates of wound dehiscence and SSI following posterior instrumented fusion., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval This research project was approved by the institutional review board. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Surgical wound complications are adverse events with important repercussions for the health of patients and health system. Surgical site infections and wound dehiscences are among the most important surgical wound complications, with a high incidence in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for non-idiopathic scoliosis. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy for surgical incisions is used as a preventive measure against surgical wound complications in adults; however, there has been scant evidence for using it in children. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incisional negative pressure wound therapy in preventing surgical wound complications in paediatric patients undergoing surgery to treat non-idiopathic scoliosis. Randomized clinical trial. Children younger than 18 years of age undergoing surgery for non-idiopathic scoliosis were randomly assigned into two groups to receive one of two different types of dressings for the first 7 days after surgery. One group were treated with a postoperative hydrofibre and hydrocolloid dressing with silver for wounds (control group), and the other group received a single-use incisional negative pressure wound therapy system (intervention group). The wounds were assessed after removal of the dressings at 7 days after surgery and again at 30, 90, and 180 days after surgery. Surgical wound complications, sociodemographic variables, variables related to the procedure and postoperative period, economic costs of treatment of surgical wound complications, and time to healing of the surgical wound were recorded. Per protocol and per intention to treat analysis was made. The per protocol incidence of surgical wound complications was 7.7% in the intervention group versus 38.5% in the control group (p = 0.009; Fisher exact test. RR = 0.20 IC95%: 0.05-0.83). Surgical wound dehiscence, surgical site infections, seroma, and fibrin were the most common surgical wound complications. The type of surgery, duration of surgery, and patients' age were associated with a higher risk for surgical wound complications. Postoperative hydrofibre and hydrocolloid dressing with silver for wounds were found to be associated with a longer time to healing. Initial costs for dressings in the group receiving incisional negative pressure wound therapy were higher, but the total postoperative costs were higher for those receiving postoperative hydrofibre and hydrocolloid dressing with silver for wounds. It was found that for each US$1.00 of extra costs for using incisional negative pressure wound therapy, there was a benefit of US$12.93 in relation to the cost of complications prevented. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy is cost-effective in the prevention of surgical wound complications in children undergoing surgery for non-idiopathic scoliosis., (© 2024 The Author(s). International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Musculoskeletal injuries are common in Cameroon. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can effectively manage complex wounds including open fractures, however high cost and unavailability prevent its widespread use. We sought to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy in Cameroon of a low-cost NPWT (LCNPWT) device built from an aquarium pump costing less than $100. We performed a prospective case series including all patients with musculoskeletal injuries managed with LCNPWT at Baptist Hospital Mutengene, Mutengene, Cameroon from 15 th March 2021 to 15 th March 2022. Patient demographics, wound characteristics, and wound photographs were collected at intake and at each dressing change (performed every 3 days). All treatment was provided inpatient, and outcomes were recorded at hospital discharge. Forty-one patients (mean age 40 years, 58% male) received LCNPWT. The most common injury mechanisms were road traffic-related accidents (n=16, 42%) and gunshots (n=8, 21%). Wound characteristics were recorded for 38 patients of which 24 (63%) had infected wounds and 3 were bacteremic (13%) on presentation. All patients received antibiotics. The average duration of LCNPWT was 5.9 days (standard deviation 3.1 days). For 15 patients with documented outcome data, LCNPWT was successful in achieving wound closure in 12 (80%). Five patients failed limb salvage, with 4 receiving amputations and 1 dying during hospitalization. Eighty-three percent of providers (15 providers) reported LCNPWT as beneficial in managing wounds. Low-cost NPWT device was effective for managing contaminated and complex wounds in a resource-limited setting., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright: Lahin Amlani et al.)

Background: Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) temporization is a technique associated with high local control rates used in myxofibrosarcoma. We sought to compare the costs and postoperative outcomes of VAC temporization and single-stage (SS) excision/reconstruction., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with myxofibrosarcoma surgically treated at our institution between 2000 and 2022. Variables of interest included total, direct, and indirect costs for initial episode of care, 90 days and 1 year after initial admission, and postoperative outcomes. Costs were compared between the VAC temporization and SS groups., Results: After matching, 13 patients in the SS group and 23 in the VAC group were analyzed. We found no difference in median and mean total inpatient costs, between the VAC temporization and SS group. While total 90-day and 1-year costs were higher in the VAC group compared to the SS group, mean costs were similar. There were no differences in postoperative complications between groups. A subanalysis of the entire cohort (n = 139) revealed lower local recurrence and overall death rates in the VAC temporization group., Conclusion: VAC temporization had similar inpatient costs and postoperative outcomes to SS excision/reconstruction. While median 90-day and 1-year costs were higher in the VAC group, mean costs did not differ., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objective: Surgical site complications (SSCs) are the leading cause of unplanned emergency department visits and readmissions following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The use of closed-incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) has shown promise in reducing SSC occurrence. However, no study has evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ciNPT in primary TJA. The purpose of this study was to calculate the break-even absolute risk reduction (ARR) of SSCs, the break-even treatment cost of SSCs, and the break-even cost-of-use for ciNPT, based on existing literature to assess the cost-effectiveness of ciNPT in primary TJA., Method: Relevant values for ARR, infection treatment cost and intervention cost were obtained via literature review. A break-even analysis was conducted to investigate the cost-effectiveness of ciNPT use in primary TJA, as well as to derive the ARR, infection treatment cost (C t ) and intervention protocol cost (C p ) values at which ciNPT use becomes cost-effective., Results: The values derived from the literature review were as follows: C p =$160.76 USD; C t =$5348.78 USD; ARR=0.0375. The break-even ARR was calculated to be 3.0%, the break-even C p was calculated to be $200.58 USD, and the break-even C t was calculated to be $4286.93 USD. The ARR of ciNPT use was greater than the calculated break-even ARR., Conclusion: This analysis demonstrated that ciNPT use in primary TJA was cost-effective. By examining the difference between the calculated break-even C p and the C p reported in the literature, the cost saved per patient treated with ciNPT can be calculated to be $39.82 USD.

Background: Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy has become a popular treatment option for wound healing. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the use of VAC therapy as a bridge before the definitive treatment for the management of deep sternal wound complications., Methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed in PubMed and Embase. Outcomes of interest included mortality, treatment failure, length of hospital stay (LOS), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and cost of treatment., Results: Twenty-two studies involving 1980 patients were included in the quantitative synthesis of this meta-analysis. Patients treated with VAC had significantly lower overall mortality [1738 patients; Risk ratio [RR] = 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25, 0.51)], treatment failure [1210 patients; RR = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.37)], LOS [498 patients; (standard mean difference = -0.44 (95% CI: -0.81, -0.07)] and ICU stay [309 patients; (standard mean difference = -0.34 (95% CI: -0.67, -0.01)] compared to that of non-VAC patients. VAC therapy was associated with reduced cost of treatment per patient compared with that of non-VAC therapies (reductions of 3600 USD, 6000 USD and 8983 USD in the reported studies)., Conclusions: VAC therapy as an adjunct in the definitive treatment of patients with deep sternal wound complications was associated with lower mortality, treatment failure, LOS, ICU stay and cost of treatment when compared with a non-VAC approach. Randomised controlled trials would be essential to confirm these findings., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Open Abdomen (OA) cases represent a significant surgical and resource challenge. AbClo is a novel non-invasive abdominal fascial closure device that engages lateral components of the abdominal wall muscles to support gradual approximation of the fascia and reduce the fascial gap. The study objective was to assess the economic implications of AbClo compared to negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) alone on OA management., Methods: We conducted a cost-minimization analysis using a decision tree comparing the use of the AbClo device to NPWT alone among patients with midline laparotomy for trauma or acute abdominal surgery who were ineligible for primary fascial closure. The time horizon was limited to the length of the inpatient hospital stay, and costs were considered from the perspective of the US Medicare payer. Clinical effectiveness data for AbClo was obtained from a randomized clinical trial. Cost data was obtained from the published literature. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. The primary outcome was incremental cost., Results: The mean cumulative costs per patient were $76 582 for those treated with NPWT alone and $70,582 for those in the group treated with the AbClo device. Compared to NPWT alone, AbClo was associated with lower incremental costs of -$6012 (95% CI -$19 449 to +$1996). The probability that AbClo was cost-savings compared to NPWT alone was 94%., Conclusions: The use of AbClo is an economically attractive strategy for management of OA in in patients with midline laparotomy for trauma or acute abdominal surgery who were ineligible for primary fascial closure., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: TD is an employee of InventoRR MD Inc. DC reports consulting fees through the Integrated Management Platform to Accelerate Clinical Trials (IMPACT) at the University of Calgary.

Background: Surgical site complications (SSCs) are common, yet preventable hospital-acquired conditions. Single-use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) has been shown to be effective in reducing rates of these complications. In the era of value-based care, strategic allocation of sNPWT is needed to optimize both clinical and financial outcomes. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the Premier Healthcare Database (2017-2021) for 10 representative open procedures in orthopedic, abdominal, cardiovascular, cesarean delivery, and breast surgery. After separating data into training and validation sets, various machine learning algorithms were used to develop pre-operative SSC risk prediction models. Model performance was assessed using standard metrics and predictors of SSCs were identified through feature importance evaluation. Highest-performing models were used to simulate the cost-effectiveness of sNPWT at both the patient and population level. Results: The prediction models demonstrated good performance, with an average area under the curve of 76%. Prominent predictors across subspecialities included age, obesity, and the level of procedure urgency. Prediction models enabled a simulation analysis to assess the population-level cost-effectiveness of sNPWT, incorporating patient and surgery-specific factors, along with the established efficacy of sNPWT for each surgical procedure. The simulation models uncovered significant variability in sNPWT's cost-effectiveness across different procedural categories. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that machine learning models can effectively predict a patient's risk of SSC and guide strategic utilization of sNPWT. This data-driven approach allows for optimization of clinical and financial outcomes by strategically allocating sNPWT based on personalized risk assessments.

Background: Disposable NPWT (dNPWT), a form of negative-pressure wound therapy, has been shown to be both outcome- and cost-effective for small to medium-sized wounds or closed incisions compared to traditional NPWT systems. When choosing a dNPWT system, multiple factors should be evaluated, including the wound size, wound type, estimated exudate production, and required days of therapy. If the device is not optimized for use in a particular patient, a much higher overall cost can be expected., Methods: A web-based search, manufacturer website review and communication, and list price-based cost analysis was performed for currently available dNPWT systems. These systems differ with respect to cost, degree of negative pressure, canister size, number of dressings included, and recommended days of therapy., Results: The results showed that 3M™ KCI devices (3M™ KCI, St. Paul, MN) cost about 6x more per day than non-KCI devices, and the V.A.C.® Via and Prevena™ Plus Customizable Incision Management System (both 3M KCI) cost over $180 per day of use. The no-canister Pico 14™ (Smith+Nephew, Watford, UK) is the most cost-effective dNPWT option, with an overall cost of $25.00 per day, but is limited to low exudate-producing wounds, such as closed incisions. At $25.67 per day, the UNO 15 (Genadyne Biotechnologies, Hicksville, NY) is the most cost-effective dNPWT option that still includes a replaceable canister system., Conclusion: We present a cost and metric comparison of currently available dNPWT systems. Despite significant differences in the cost of treatment with each dNPWT device, there has been limited research on their relative efficacies.

Introduction: Implant loss due to infection is the most devastating complication of implant-based breast reconstruction. The use of negative pressure wound therapy with instillation(NPWTi) for salvage of infected implant-based breast reconstructions has shown promising results allowing early reinsertion of a new implant as an alternative to the current management with delayed reinsertion. This study compares the patient-reported outcome and cost implication of NPWTi to the current management., Methods: Twenty cases of infected breast implants treated with NPWTi(V.A.C. VERAFLO™ Therapy), followed by early reinsertion of new implants were compared to 20 cases that had delayed reinsertion(non-NPWTi). Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the BREAST-Q questionnaire. The average cost per patient was calculated using total operative expense, cost of inpatient stay, investigations, antibiotics, and outpatient visits., Results: Treatment with NPWTi allowed earlier reinsertion of a new implant (NPWTi: 10.3 ± 2.77days vs. non-NPWTi: 247.45±111.28days, p<0.001). Patients in the NPWTi group reported higher satisfaction. The average cost per patient for NPWTi and non-NPWTi was £14,343.13±£2,786.70 and £8,920.31±£3,005.73, respectively(p<0.001). All patients treated with NPWTi had one admission and spent 11.9 ± 4.1days as inpatients, while non-NPWTi patients had 2.1 ± 0.3 admissions(p<0.001) and spent 7.1 ± 5.8days(p<0.004) as inpatients. Patients treated with NPWTi had more procedures (NPWTi:3.35±0.81 Vs. non-NPWTi:2.2 ± 0.41, p = 0.006); however, three non-NPWTi cases required flap reconstruction., Conclusion: Patients treated with NPWTi reported higher satisfaction, received a new and earlier implant, and had fewer admissions and outpatient visits; however, they incurred higher average costs, longer inpatient stays, and underwent more procedures. Early implant reinsertion preserves skin envelope; hence avoiding additional cost and stress related to further major autologous reconstruction., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors do not have any conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes for children with burns by accelerating wound re-epithelialisation. Its effects on healthcare costs, however, remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NPWT from a healthcare provider perspective using evidence from the SONATA in C randomised controlled trial, in which 101 children with small-area burns were allocated to either standard care (silver-impregnated dressings) or standard care in combination with adjunctive NPWT. The primary outcome, time to re-epithelialisation, was assessed through a blinded photographic review. Resource usage and costs were prospectively recorded for each participant for up to 6 months. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and dominance probabilities were estimated and uncertainty quantified using bootstrap resampling. Mean costs per participant-including dressings, labour, medication, scar management, and theatre operations-were lower in the NPWT group (AUD $903.69) relative to the control group (AUD $1669.01). There was an 89% probability that NPWT was dominant, yielding both faster re-epithelialisation and lower overall costs. Findings remained robust to sensitivity analyses employing alternative theatre costs and time-to-re-epithelialisation estimates for grafted patients. In conclusion, adjunctive NPWT is likely to be a cost-effective and dominant treatment for small-area paediatric burns (ANZCTR.org.au:ACTRN12618000256279)., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: Single-use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) following closed surgical incisions has a demonstrable effect in reducing surgical site complications (SSC). However, there is little health economic evidence to support its widespread use. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sNPWT compared with standard care in reducing SSCs following closed surgical incisions., Method: A decision analytic model was developed to explore the total costs and health outcomes associated with the use of the interventions in patients following vascular, colorectal, cardiothoracic, orthopaedic, C-section and breast surgery from the UK National Health Service (NHS) and US payer perspective over a 12-week time horizon. We modelled complications avoided (surgical site infection (SSI) and dehiscence) using data from a recently published meta-analysis. Cost data were sourced from published literature, NHS reference costs and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We conducted subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes, an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 and body mass index (BMI) ≥30kg/m 2 . A sensitivity analysis was also conducted., Results: sNPWT resulted in better clinical outcomes and overall savings of £105 per patient from the UK perspective and $637 per patient from the US perspective. There were more savings when higher-risk patients with diabetes, or a BMI ≥30kg/m 2 or an ASA≥3 were considered. We conducted both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and the results suggested that this conclusion is robust., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the use of sNPWT following closed surgical incisions saves cost when compared with standard care because of reduced incidence of SSC. Patients at higher risk should be targeted first as they benefit more from sNPWT. This analysis is underpinned by strong and robust clinical evidence from both randomised and observational studies.

This project focused on adult lower extremity amputees from March 2017 through March 2019. The aim was to improve 30-day surgical site infection (SSI) rates by 10% in two orthopaedic populations. Subaims focused on 30-day readmission rates, length of stay, and 30-day mortality rates. The primary intervention of incisional negative pressure wound vac therapy (iNPWT) device application was instituted. This was supported by World Health Organization recommendations, meta-analyses, and consensus statements advising the utilization of iNPWT devices. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were aimed at education, operation efficiency, and patient engagement. By March 2019, goals were met for SSI and 30-day readmission rates in each division. Cost analysis showed a savings of $38,500. Improved clinical significance was noted in SSI rates, 30-day readmission rates, and cost in lower extremity amputees. It is unclear whether the innovation led to improvement in the other subaims; however, this revealed areas for additional areas for improvement., (Copyright © 2021 by National Association of Orthopaedic Nurses.)

Background: Single-use negative-pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) has been reported to reduce the incidence of reconstruction failure in prepectoral breast reconstruction compared with standard surgical dressings. The aim of this economic evaluation was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of sNPWT compared with standard care for the prevention of reconstruction failure in prepectoral breast reconstruction in the UK., Method: A decision tree model was used to estimate the expected cost and effectiveness per patient. Effectiveness was measured both by the number of reconstruction failures avoided and the gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The baseline incidence of reconstruction failure (8.6 per cent) was taken from a recently published study of 2655 mastectomies in the UK. The effectiveness of sNPWT used results from a clinical study comparing sNPWT with standard dressings. Previously published utility weights were applied. The cost of reconstruction failure was estimated from detailed resource data from patients with reconstruction failure, applying National Health Service reference costs. One-way, probabilistic, scenario and threshold analyses were conducted., Results: The undiscounted cost per patient associated with reconstruction failure was estimated to be £23 628 (£22 431 discounted). The use of sNPWT was associated with an expected cost saving of £1706 per patient, an expected increase in QALYs of 0.0187 and an expected 0.0834 reconstruction failures avoided. Cost-effectiveness acceptability analysis demonstrated that, at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY, 99.94 per cent of the simulations showed sNPWT to be more cost-effective than standard care., Conclusion: Among patients undergoing immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction, the use of sNPWT is more cost-effective than standard dressings., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Aim: While the scientific evidence in favour of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) dressings on sutured incisions in the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs) has increased, the cost-effectiveness after vascular surgery has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared to standard dressings for the prevention of SSIs after open inguinal vascular surgery., Materials and Methods: Patient data were retrieved from the randomised INVIPS-trial's open arm, which included patients randomised to either NPWT or standard dressings. The patients were surveyed for SSIs for 90 days postoperatively. The patients' individual cost data were included and analysed from a healthcare perspective. The patients' quality of life was measured using the Vascuqol-6 questionnaire pre- and 30 days postoperatively. Cost-effectiveness of NPWT was determined by decreased or equal total costs and a significant reduction in SSI incidence., Results: The mean vascular procedure-related costs at 90 days were €16,621 for patients treated with NPWT (n = 59) and €16,285 for patients treated with standard dressings (n = 60), p = 0.85. The SSI incidence in patients treated with NPWT was 11.9% (n = 7/59) compared to 30.0% (n = 18/60) with standard dressings, p = 0.015. This corresponds to an increased mean cost of €1,853 per SSI avoided. The cost-effectiveness plane of incremental vascular procedure-related costs and difference in Vascuqol-6 score showed that 42% of estimates were in the quadrant where NPWT was dominant., Conclusion: NPWT is considered cost-effective over standard dressings in patients undergoing open inguinal vascular surgery due to reduced SSI incidence at no higher costs., (Copyright © 2020 Tissue Viability Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become a mainstay in the armamentarium for wound care. Since the initial commercial vacuum-assisted closure device became available in 1995, subsequent research has confirmed the positive physiological effects of negative pressure on wound healing. Traditionally, NPWT has been used to improve healing of open nonsurgical wounds by secondary intention. However, the clinical applications of NPWT have significantly broadened, and now also include use in open surgical wounds, closed surgical incisions, and skin graft surgery. In addition, devices have evolved and now include functionality and features such as instillation, antimicrobial sponges, and portability. Areas covered: This article reviews the history, background, and physiology underlying NPWT, as well as the most commonly used devices. In addition, an evidence-based discussion of the current clinical applications of NPWT is presented, with a focus on those with high levels of evidence. Expert opinion: Future directions for device development include modifications to increase ease of use by patients and to allow its use in a broader array of anatomic areas. Lastly, more research with high levels of evidence is needed to better define the outcomes associated with NPWT, including in relation to specific clinical applications and cost.

Wounds with exposed bone pose a significant challenge in healing. Negative pressure wound therapy has simplified reconstructive options. In economically constrained regions, this has been modified with materials that are affordable. Its effect on such wounds has not been well studied and so case summaries of 15 patients with 17 wounds who were managed with modified negative pressure wound therapy at Ntasiobi Specialist Hospital and ESUT Teaching Hospital between 2015 and 2019 were obtained. The procedure progressed satisfactorily in 88% of patients with granulation tissue covering the bones while the procedure was discontinued in 12%. The modified negative pressure wound therapy achieves similar results as the patented version and is recommended where resources are limited.

Background: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been used because of its perceived advantages in reducing surgical site infections, wound complications, and the need for further surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess the infection rates, wound complications, length of stay, and financial burden associated with NPWT use in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA)., Methods: We performed a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) systematic review of the existing literature on using NPWT in primary and revision TKA. PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, and the Cochrane Library were utilized. The risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria., Results: Twelve articles that evaluated 1,403 primary TKAs and 279 revision TKAs were reviewed. NPWT significantly reduced complication rates in revision TKA. However, there was no significant difference in infection rates between NPWT and regular dressings in primary or revision TKA. NPWT use in primary TKA significantly increased the risk of blistering, although no increase in reoperations was noted. The analysis showed a possible reduction in length of stay associated with NPWT use for both primary and revision TKA, with overall health-care cost savings., Conclusions: Based on a meta-analysis of the existing literature, we do not recommend the routine use of NPWT. However, in high-risk revision TKA and selected primary TKA cases, NPWT reduced wound complications and may have health-care cost savings., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors indicated that no external funding was received for any aspect of this work. On the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms, which are provided with the online version of the article, one or more of the authors checked “yes” to indicate that the author had a relevant financial relationship in the biomedical arena outside the submitted work (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/G269)., (Copyright © 2020 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.)

Background: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is commonly used to manage complex wounds in the pediatric population. With recently developed portable NPWT devices, providers have the opportunity to transition NPWT to the outpatient setting. However, there are no studies describing outpatient NPWT in pediatric patients. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to leverage a population-level analysis to advance our current knowledge about outpatient NPWT use in pediatric patients., Materials and Methods: We analyzed the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims Database from 2006 to 2014 to identify children treated with NPWT. We compared patient characteristics, indications, complications before and after NPWT, health care utilization within 30 d of NPWT initiation, and health care cost profile of patients treated with NPWT primarily as outpatients versus inpatients. Outpatient NPWT was defined as patients with ≤50% of NPWT coded during an inpatient hospitalization, whereas inpatient NPWT was defined as patients with >50% of NPWT., Results: We identified 3184 patients (1621 inpatients and 1563 outpatients) aged 0-17 y, who were treated with NPWT from 2006 to 2014. Outpatient NPWT was implemented across multiple ages, comorbidities, and indications, with a low complication rate (2.4%). After controlling for hematologic comorbidity and indications, outpatient NPWT was associated with lower risk of complications (odds ratio: 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.86) and lower median total costs ($5602.03) compared with inpatient ($15,233.21) therapy., Conclusions: Outpatient NPWT management in pediatric patients was associated with low complication rates. Additional studies are necessary to determine the most overall cost-effective treatment setting for NPWT in the pediatric population., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reduced surgical site infection (SSI) rates have been reported with use of closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) in high-risk patients., Methods: A deep learning-based, risk-based prediction model was developed from a large national database of 72,435 patients who received infrainguinal vascular surgeries involving upper thigh/groin incisions. Patient demographics, histories, laboratory values, and other variables were inputs to the multilayered, adaptive model. The model was then retrospectively applied to a prospectively tracked single hospital data set of 370 similar patients undergoing vascular surgery, with ciNPT or control dressings applied over the closed incision at the surgeon's discretion. Objective predictive risk scores were generated for each patient and used to categorize patients as "high" or "low" predicted risk for SSI., Results: Actual institutional cohort SSI rates were 10/148 (6.8%) and 28/134 (20.9%) for high-risk ciNPT versus control, respectively (P < 0.001), and 3/31 (9.7%) and 5/57 (8.8%) for low-risk ciNPT versus control, respectively (P = 0.99). Application of the model to the institutional cohort suggested that 205/370 (55.4%) patients were matched with their appropriate intervention over closed surgical incision (high risk with ciNPT or low risk with control), and 165/370 (44.6%) were inappropriately matched. With the model applied to the cohort, the predicted SSI rate with perfect utilization would be 27/370 (7.3%), versus 12.4% actual rate, with estimated cost savings of $231-$458 per patient., Conclusions: Compared with a subjective practice strategy, an objective risk-based strategy using prediction software may be associated with superior results in optimizing SSI rates and costs after vascular surgery., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The objective was to estimate the cost of care associated with two negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) technologies used to treat patients admitted to the hospital with moderate-to-severe foot infections. Materials & methods: A decision tree simulation model was developed to estimate the hospital costs associated with two different NPWT technologies: Cardinal Health™ PRO (NPWT-C) and V.A.C. ULTA™ (NPWT-K). Clinical data were obtained from a previously completed single-site prospective trial. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to gauge the robustness of the results. Results: The total expected per-patient costs were US$41,206 (SD: US$8,194) for NPWT-C and US$44,439 (SD: US$8,963) for NPWT-K. Conclusion: This study found that NPWT-C was expected to minimize the total costs over the episode of treatment. Larger and more clinically diverse studies are recommended to confirm these findings.

Aims: To compare the cost-utility of standard dressing with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in adults with closed surgical wounds associated with major trauma to the lower limbs., Methods: A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective based on data collected from the Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma (WHiST) multicentre randomized clinical trial. Health resource utilization was collected over a six-month post-randomization period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-utility was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates while uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves., Results: The incremental cost of standard dressing versus iNPWT over six months was £2,037 (95% confidence interval (CI) £349 to £3,724). There was an insignificant increment in QALYs gained in the iNPWT group (0.005, 95% CI -0.018 to 0.028). The probability of iNPWT being cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY was 1.9%. The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis., Conclusion: The within-trial economic evaluation suggests that iNPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to standard dressing in adults with closed surgical wounds to their lower limbs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1072-1081.

Background: Major trauma is the leading cause of death in people aged < 45 years. Patients with major trauma usually have lower-limb fractures. Surgery to fix the fractures is complicated and the risk of infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgery could potentially reduce the risk of infection., Objectives: To assess the deep surgical site infection rate, disability, quality of life, patient assessment of the surgical scar and resource use in patients with surgical incisions associated with fractures following major trauma to the lower limbs treated with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard dressings., Design: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial., Setting: Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals representing the UK Major Trauma Network., Participants: A total of 1548 adult patients were randomised from September 2016 to April 2018. Exclusion criteria included presentation > 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires., Interventions: Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy ( n  = 785), in which a non-adherent absorbent dressing covered with a semipermeable membrane is connected to a pump to create a partial vacuum over the wound, versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure ( n  = 763). Trial participants and the treating surgeon could not be blinded to treatment allocation., Main Outcome Measures: Deep surgical site infection at 30 days was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were deep infection at 90 days, the results of the Disability Rating Index, health-related quality of life, the results of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and resource use collected at 3 and 6 months post surgery., Results: A total of 98% of participants provided primary outcome data. There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of deep surgical site infection at 30 days. The infection rate was 6.7% (50/749) in the standard dressing group and 5.8% (45/770) in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (intention-to-treat odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.33; p  = 0.52). There was no difference in the deep surgical site infection rate at 90 days: 13.2% in the standard dressing group and 11.4% in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.19; p  = 0.32). There was no difference between the two groups in disability, quality of life or scar appearance at 3 or 6 months. Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy did not reduce the cost of treatment and was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness., Limitations: Owing to the emergency nature of the surgery, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised would subsequently be unable or unwilling to participate. However, the majority of the patients (85%) agreed to participate. Therefore, participants were representative of the population with lower-limb fractures associated with major trauma., Conclusions: The findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to the lower limbs., Future Work: Our work suggests that the use of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy dressings in other at-risk surgical wounds requires further investigation. Future research may also investigate different approaches to reduce postoperative infections, for example the use of topical antibiotic preparations in surgical wounds and the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12702354 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio ID20416., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 24, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information., Competing Interests: Matthew L Costa is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator and a member of the General Board for the NIHR Health Technology Assessment funding stream. Julie Bruce receives personal fees as a consultant for Medtronic plc (Dublin, Ireland) (an unrelated study). Jagdeep Nanchahal receives personal fees and non-financial support from Smith & Nephew plc (London, UK) and Orthofix Holdings Inc. (Lewisville, TX, USA).

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and value of a novel borate-based bioactive glass fiber (BBGF) advanced wound matrix in the treatment of chronic wounds., Methods: Four patients with chronic wounds that had failed multiple prior treatments were identified and treated with the BBGF technology. Patient demographics, wound characteristics, and prior treatment history were obtained. Costs associated with prior treatments were estimated and recorded using available cost data., Results: The average wound duration prior to initiation of BBGF treatment was 391 days. All of the patients had a history of multiple failed interventions, including operative procedures, negative-pressure wound therapy, cellular and/or tissue-based products, dermal grafts, and synthetic wound matrices. Prior interventions resulted in an average estimated cost of $87,750 per patient. All of the patients achieved complete wound closure in an average of 55 days using BBGF treatment. Patients were treated with 3.3 applications of the BBGF product on average, with an average cost of $3,564. The use of the BBGF advanced wound matrix on initial presentation could have saved the healthcare system an average of $84,186 per patient and reduced wound duration by an average of 336 days., Conclusions: The BBGF advanced wound matrix resulted in the healing of chronic wounds that had failed multiple prior interventions. In this series of challenging cases, BBGF accelerated healing while minimizing costs and improving patient outcomes. By offering an effective therapy at a low cost, BBGF has the potential to add significant value for both the healthcare system and the patient.

Background: Open abdominal surgery is associated with high rates of wound complications . Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with prolonged length of stay, delayed treatment and high rates of readmission (1, 3, 4) . Negative pressure wound therapy over closed incisions (ciNPWT) is a novel approach to prevention of SSI. We reviewed the outcomes of studies comparing ciNPWT and standard therapy in open abdominal wounds to assess the efficacy of the current evidence base., Aim: To assess the effect of negative pressure wound therapy used over closed incisions in open abdominal surgery., Methods: Search of relevant terms was conducted on PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane to identify studies published between Jan 2006-Feb 2019. Studies were chosen based on specific inclusion criteria. Articles were screened to assess demographics, study design and outcomes., Results: Seven retrospective and six prospective randomised controlled trials were identified for inclusion, totalling 3048 participants. 967 received ciNPWT and 2081 received standard treatment. Studies assessed a mix of surgeries (colorectal n = 6, pancreaticoduodenectomy n = 1, gynaecologic n = 1, acute care surgery n = 1, mixed open n = 2). ciNPWT was statistically significant in reducing SSI in 9 of 13 studies., Conclusion: ciNPWT in open abdominal surgery has demonstrated promising results for reducing SSI rate in some trials however, patient selection remains unclear. Recent randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate benefit overall with use of ciNPWT in open abdominal surgery. Further multicentre prospective trials are needed for cost-benefit analysis and appropriate patient-selection., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2019 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims and Objectives: To explore surgeons' and nurses' perspectives of managing surgical wounds healing by secondary intention., Background: Every year, more than 10 million surgical operations are performed in the NHS in the UK. Most surgical wounds heal by primary intention, where the edges of the wound are brought together with staples, sutures, adhesive glue or clips. Sometimes wounds are deliberately left open to heal, from the base up, known as "healing by secondary intention." These wounds are often slow to heal, prone to infection and complex to manage., Design: A qualitative, descriptive approach, using semi-structured interviews., Methods: Interviews with five (general, vascular and plastic) surgeons and 7 nurses (3 tissue viability nurses, 2 district and 1 community nurse, and 1 hospital nurse) working in hospital and community care settings in two locations in the north of England. Data analysis followed the recommended sequential steps of "Framework" approach. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research guided the study report., Results: Participants reported that the main types of wounds healing by secondary intention that they manage are extensive abdominal cavity wounds; open wounds relating to treatment for pilonidal sinus; large open wounds on the feet of patients with diabetes; and axilla and groin wounds, associated with removal of lymph nodes for cancer. Infection and prolonged time to healing were the main challenges. Negative pressure wound therapy was the most favoured treatment option., Conclusions: Negative pressure wound therapy was advocated by professionals despite a lack of research evidence indicating clinical or cost-effectiveness. Our findings underscore the need for rigorous evaluation of negative pressure wound therapy, and other wound care treatments, through studies that include economic evaluation., Relevance for Clinical Practice: Clinical decision-making in wound care could be optimised through further robust studies to inform practitioners about the cost-effectiveness of available treatments., (© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain., Objectives: To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure., Search Methods: In June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting., Selection Criteria: We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another type of NPWT., Data Collection and Analysis: At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology., Main Results: In this third update, we added 15 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three new economic studies, resulting in a total of 44 RCTs (7447 included participants) and five economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in the context of a wide range of surgeries including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. Economic studies assessed NPWT in orthopaedic, obstetric and general surgical settings. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Four studies (2107 participants) reported mortality. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (2.3%) compared with standard dressings (2.7%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.47; I 2 = 0%). Thirty-nine studies reported SSI; 31 of these (6204 participants), were included in meta-analysis. There is moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias) that NPWT probably results in fewer SSI (8.8% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (13.0% of participants) after surgery; RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80 ; I 2 = 23%). Eighteen studies reported dehiscence; 14 of these (3809 participants) were included in meta-analysis. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of dehiscence after surgery for NPWT (5.3% of participants) compared with standard dressings (6.2% of participants) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13; I 2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence showing no clear difference between NPWT and standard treatment for the outcomes of reoperation and incidence of seroma. For reoperation, the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.41; I 2 = 13%; 12 trials; 3523 participants); for seroma, the RR was 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.05; I 2 = 0%; seven trials; 729 participants). The effect of NPWT on occurrence of haematoma or skin blisters is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence); for haematoma, the RR was 0.67 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.59; I 2 = 0%; nine trials; 1202 participants) and for blisters the RR was 2.64 (95% CI 0.65 to 10.68; I 2 = 69%; seven trials; 796 participants). The overall effect of NPWT on pain is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence from seven trials (2218 participants) which reported disparate measures of pain); but moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably little difference between the groups in pain after three or six months following surgery for lower limb fracture (one trial, 1549 participants). There is also moderate-certainty evidence for women undergoing caesarean sections (one trial, 876 participants) and people having surgery for lower limb fractures (one trial, 1549 participants) that there is probably little difference in quality of life scores at 30 days or 3 or 6 months, respectively. Cost-effectiveness Five economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials included in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in four indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years for treatment groups and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the grade of the evidence varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed., Authors' Conclusions: People experiencing primary wound closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSI than people treated with standard dressings (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no clear difference in number of deaths or wound dehiscence between people treated with NPWT and standard dressings (low-certainty evidence). There are also no clear differences in secondary outcomes where all evidence was low or very low-certainty. In caesarean section in obese women and surgery for lower limb fracture, there is probably little difference in quality of life scores (moderate-certainty evidence). Most evidence on pain is very low-certainty, but there is probably no difference in pain between NPWT and standard dressings after surgery for lower limb fracture (moderate-certainty evidence). Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.)

Background: Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain., Objectives: To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure., Search Methods: In June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting., Selection Criteria: We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another type of NPWT., Data Collection and Analysis: At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology., Main Results: In this third update, we added 15 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three new economic studies, resulting in a total of 44 RCTs (7447 included participants) and five economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in the context of a wide range of surgeries including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. Economic studies assessed NPWT in orthopaedic, obstetric and general surgical settings. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Four studies (2107 participants) reported mortality. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (2.3%) compared with standard dressings (2.7%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.47; I 2 = 0%). Thirty-nine studies reported SSI; 31 of these (6204 participants), were included in meta-analysis. There is moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias) that NPWT probably results in fewer SSI (8.8% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (13.0% of participants) after surgery; RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80 ; I 2 = 23%). Eighteen studies reported dehiscence; 14 of these (3809 participants) were included in meta-analysis. There is low-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision) showing no clear difference in the risk of dehiscence after surgery for NPWT (5.3% of participants) compared with standard dressings (6.2% of participants) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.13; I 2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence showing no clear difference between NPWT and standard treatment for the outcomes of reoperation and incidence of seroma. For reoperation, the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.41; I 2 = 13%; 12 trials; 3523 participants); for seroma, the RR was 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.05; I 2 = 0%; seven trials; 729 participants). The effect of NPWT on occurrence of haematoma or skin blisters is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence); for haematoma, the RR was 0.67 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.59; I 2 = 0%; nine trials; 1202 participants) and for blisters the RR was 2.64 (95% CI 0.65 to 10.68; I 2 = 69%; seven trials; 796 participants). The overall effect of NPWT on pain is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence from seven trials (2218 participants) which reported disparate measures of pain); but moderate-certainty evidence suggests there is probably little difference between the groups in pain after three or six months following surgery for lower limb fracture (one trial, 1549 participants). There is also moderate-certainty evidence for women undergoing caesarean sections (one trial, 876 participants) and people having surgery for lower limb fractures (one trial, 1549 participants) that there is probably little difference in quality of life scores at 30 days or 3 or 6 months, respectively. Cost-effectiveness Five economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials included in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in four indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years for treatment groups and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the grade of the evidence varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed., Authors' Conclusions: People experiencing primary wound closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSI than people treated with standard dressings (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no clear difference in number of deaths or wound dehiscence between people treated with NPWT and standard dressings (low-certainty evidence). There are also no clear differences in secondary outcomes where all evidence was low or very low-certainty. In caesarean section in obese women and surgery for lower limb fracture, there is probably little difference in quality of life scores (moderate-certainty evidence). Most evidence on pain is very low-certainty, but there is probably no difference in pain between NPWT and standard dressings after surgery for lower limb fracture (moderate-certainty evidence). Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The role of negative pressure wound therapy in stoma reversal surgery remains unknown. To evaluate this, a retrospective, non-randomized, single-institution, pilot study was conducted. Surgeon preference determined type of wound closure and application of the single-brand negative wound pressure device. No patient in the intervention group suffered wound complications, but five of the thirty-six patients in the control group suffered surgical site infection-related complications. Primary closure and negative pressure wound therapy use decreases wound complications in stoma reversal surgery, thereby alleviating the wound-management burden in hospitals and in the community. This has cost-saving implications, but further studies are needed., (Copyright © 2019 The Healthcare Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Lower extremity ulcers such as venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) have a major clinical and economic impact on patients and providers., Purpose: The purpose of this economic evaluation was to determine the cost-effectiveness of single-use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) compared with traditional NPWT (tNPWT) for the treatment of VLUs and DFUs in the United States., Methods: A Markov decision-analytic model was used to compare the incremental cost and ulcer weeks avoided for a time horizon of 12 and 26 weeks using lower extremity ulcer closure rates from a published randomized controlled trial (N = 161) that compared sNPWT with tNPWT. Treatment costs were extracted from a retrospective cost-minimization study of sNPWT and tNPWT from the payer perspective using US national 2016 Medicare claims data inflated to 2018 costs and multiplied by 7 to estimate the weekly costs of treatment for sNPWT and tNPWT. Two (2) arms of the model, tNPWT and sNPWT, were calculated separately for a combination of both VLU and DFU ulcer types. In this model, a hypothetical cohort of patients began in the open ulcer health state, and at the end of each weekly cycle a proportion of the cohort moved into the closed ulcer health state according to a constant transition probability. The costs over the defined timescale were summed to give a total cost of treatment for each arm of the model, and then the difference between the arms was calculated. Effectiveness was calculated by noting the incidence of healing at 12 and 26 weeks and the total number of open ulcer weeks; the incremental effectiveness was calculated as sNPWT effectiveness minus tNPWT effectiveness. Data were extracted to Excel spreadsheets and subjected to one-way sensitivity, scenario (where patients with unhealed ulcers were changed to standard care at 4 or 12 weeks), probabilistic, and threshold analyses., Results: sNPWT was found to provide an expected cost saving of $7756 per patient and an expected reduction of 1.67 open ulcer weeks per patient over 12 weeks and a cost reduction of $15 749 and 5.31 open ulcer weeks over 26 weeks. Probabilistic analysis at 26 weeks showed 99.8% of the simulations resulted in sNPWT dominating tNPWT. Scenario analyses showed that sNPWT remained dominant over tNPWT (cost reductions over 26 weeks of $2536 and $7976 per patient, respectively)., Conclusion: Using sNPWT for VLUs and DFUs is likely to be more cost-effective than tNPWT from the US payer perspective and may provide an opportunity for policymakers to reduce the economic burden of lower extremity ulcers.

Background: The risk of death in severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) remains high despite decades of surgical and antimicrobial research. New management strategies are required to improve outcomes. The Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) trial investigates an open-abdomen (OA) approach with active negative pressure peritoneal therapy. This therapy is hypothesized to better manage peritoneal bacterial contamination, drain inflammatory ascites, and reduce the risk of intra-abdominal hypertension leading to improved survival and decreased complications. The total costs and cost-effectiveness of this therapy (as compared with standard fascial closure) are unknown., Methods: We propose a parallel cost-utility analysis of this intervention to be conducted alongside the 1-year trial, extrapolating beyond that using decision analysis. Using resource use metrics (e.g., length of stay, re-admissions) from patients at all study sites and microcosting data from patients enrolled in Calgary, Alberta, the mean cost difference between treatment arms will be established from a publicly-funded health care payer perspective. Quality of life will be measured at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively with the Euroqol EQ-5D-5 L and SF-36 surveys. A within-trial analysis will establish cost and utility at 1 year, using a bootstrapping approach to provide confidence intervals around an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. If neither operative strategy is economically dominant, Markov modeling will be used to extrapolate the cost per quality-adjusted life years gained to 2-, 5-, 10-year, and lifetime horizons. Future costs and benefits will be discounted at 1.5% per annum. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve will be generated using Monte Carlo simulation. If all trial outcomes are similar, the primary analysis will default to a cost-minimization approach. Subgroup analysis will be carried out for patients with and without septic shock at presentation, and for patients whose initial APACHE II scores are > 20 versus ≤ 20., Discussion: In addition to an estimate of the clinical effectiveness of an OA approach for SCIAS, an understanding of its cost effectiveness will be required prior to its adoption in any resource-constrained environment. We will estimate this key parameter for use by clinicians and policymakers., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03163095, registered May 22, 2017.

Background: Although the wound-healing period for purse-string closure (PSC) after stoma reversal is longer than that required for the primary closure method, the rate of wound infection is reduced. The application of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can reduce the healing period for many types of wounds. Herein, we describe a planned trial to test the hypothesis that NPWT can reduce the healing period for PSC after stoma reversal., Methods/design: Patients undergoing stoma reversal will be recruited and allocated into intervention and control groups, with 1:1 randomisation. Patients in the control group will receive standard postsurgical wound care; patients in the intervention group will receive NPWT using the PICO™ system. The target sample size will be 38 patients, as this will provide 80% power at the 5% level of significance to detect a 7-day reduction in the wound-healing period in the intervention group compared to that in the control group. The primary endpoint will be the duration to wound healing, defined as the time to nearly complete epithelisation of the wound, without any discharge or surgical site infection (SSI). Secondary endpoints will be the SSI rate, length of postoperative hospital stay, number of wound dressings and visits to the hospital for wound dressing after discharge, total cost of wound dressings, and patient and observer scar assessment scale scores., Discussion: The results of this planned randomised controlled study will clarify the role of NPWT in patients undergoing stoma reversal and strengthen the rationale for choosing a dressing technique., Trial Registration: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0004063. Registered on 6 June 2019.

Background: Endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVAC) is an emerging procedure used to treat anastomotic leaks and/or perforations that would otherwise require surgery. The aim of this study was to determine time to proficiency in EVAC and the cost effectiveness of the procedure., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively maintained IRB approved database for all patients undergoing EVAC after esophageal and gastric complications between October 2013 and December 2017. Proficiency was determined by obtaining predicted estimates and analyzing the point at which average procedure time plateaued based on case volume. Total cost was calculated based on supplies and location where the procedure was performed., Results: There were 50 patients (17 males, 33 female), with a mean age of 52.1 years. EVAC was placed in 23 (46%) patients with esophageal injuries and 28 (56%) with gastric injuries. Two advanced endoscopists performed all EVAC procedures in this study (1 surgeon, 1 gastroenterologist). The average procedure time for all patients was 43.5 min and the average wheel in/wheel out time for all patients was 75.6 min. Analysis of the trend based on average procedure times for EVAC revealed that proficiency was obtained after 10 cases. Total cost of the procedure is significantly lower in the GI lab compared to the operating room ($4528 vs. $11889). The majority of EVAC were performed in the GI lab (62%) compared to the operating room (38%)., Conclusion: Successful outcomes in managing anastomotic leaks or intestinal perforations non-operatively has led to an increased interest in EVAC. For advanced endoscopists, time to proficiency is approximately 10 cases. Performing the procedure in the GI lab has a 2.5 reduction in total cost compared to the operating room.

Background: Negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) gained widespread clinical use after its introduction in the 1990s because of its many beneficial effects on the wound environment. However, high treatment costs have limited its use in third-world countries. The present study compares a low-cost, locally developed NPWT system with a commercially available system in terms of efficacy, reliability, ease of application, and safety., Methods: This prospective, randomized controlled trial involved 36 patients who were managed with NPWT with either a low-cost, locally developed system (AquaVac) or a commercially available Vacuum-Assisted Closure Advanced Therapy System (VAC ATS; KCI). The low-cost NPWT system described consists of a converted aquarium pump as a reusable vacuum source and a dressing system that can be found in the hospital supply room: food plastic wrap as an occlusive drape, surgical gauze as wound filler, nasogastric tubes as tubing, and used intravenous (IV) bottles as effluent canisters. The purpose of the study was to compare the 2 systems in terms of (1) time to apply the dressing, (2) exudate levels, (3) amount of granulation tissue, (4) wound size reduction, (5) average cost of treatment, (6) visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and (7) complications., Results: The experimental low-cost system had a small but statistically insignificant advantage over the commercially available system in terms of application time, pain during dressing changes, and wound contraction percentage. The 2 systems were comparable in terms of the amount of exudate, granulation tissue coverage, and VAS scores during the course of treatment. No wound or periwound complications were observed. The systems were significantly different in terms of cost, with the AquaVac system being 7 times less expensive than the VAC ATS system ($63.75 compared with $491.38 USD)., Conclusions: The low-cost AquaVac system was shown to be comparable with the commercial VAC ATS system, suggesting that it is an effective and safe alternative method for NPWT in resource-challenged settings., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Aims: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard wound management after initial surgical wound debridement in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb., Patients and Methods: An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the United Kingdom NHS and Personal Social Services, based on evidence from the 460 participants in the Wound Management of Open Lower Limb Fractures (WOLLF) trial. Economic outcomes were collected prospectively over the 12-month follow-up period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Bivariate regression of costs (given in £, 2014 to 2015 prices) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained associated with NPWT dressings. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were undertaken to assess the impacts of uncertainty and heterogeneity, respectively, surrounding aspects of the economic evaluation., Results: The base case analysis produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £267 910 per QALY gained, reflecting higher costs on average (£678; 95% confidence interval (CI) -£1082 to £2438) and only marginally higher QALYS (0.002; 95% CI -0.054 to 0.059) in the NPWT group. The probability that NPWT is cost-effective in this patient population did not exceed 27% regardless of the value of the cost-effectiveness threshold. This result remained robust to several sensitivity and subgroup analyses., Conclusion: This trial-based economic evaluation suggests that NPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective strategy for improving outcomes in adult patients with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1392-1401.

Background: Sternal wound infections (SWIs) can be a devastating long-term complication with significant morbidity and health care cost. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of negative pressure incision management systems (NPIMS) in cardiac surgery., Materials and Methods: All cardiac surgery cases at an academic hospital with risk scores available (2009-2017) were extracted from an institutional database (n = 4455). Patients were stratified by utilization of NPIMS, and high risk was defined as above the median. Costs included infection-related readmissions and were adjusted for inflation. Multivariable regression models assessed the risk-adjusted cost of SWI and efficacy of NPIMS use. Cost-effectiveness was modeled using TreeAge Pro using institutional results., Results: The rate of deep SWI was 0.9% with an estimated cost of $111,175 (P < 0.0001). The rate of superficial SWI was 0.8% at a cost of $7981 (P = 0.08). Risk-adjusted NPIMS use was not significantly associated with reduced SWI (OR 1.2, P = 0.62) and thus not cost-effective. However, in the high-risk cohort with an OR 0.84 (P = 0.72) and SWI rate of 2.3%, NPIMS use cost $205 per patient with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $179,092. Therefore, NPIMS is estimated to be cost-effective with a deep SWI rate over 1.3% or improved efficacy (OR < 0.83)., Conclusions: SWIs are extremely expensive complications with estimates of $111,175 for deep yet only $7981 for superficial. Although NPIMS was not cost-effective for SWI prevention as currently utilized, a protocol for use on patients with a higher risk of sternal infection could be cost-effective., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Complications after pressure ulcer reconstruction are common. A complication rate of 21% to 58% and a 27% wound recurrence has been reported. The aim of this study was to decrease postoperative wound-healing complications with incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) postoperatively. This was a prospective non-randomised trial with a historic control. Surgically treated pressure ulcer patients receiving iNPWT were included in the prospective part of the study (Treatment group) and compared with the historic patient cohort of all consecutive surgically treated pressure ulcer patients during a 2-year period preceding the initiation of iNPWT (Control). There were 24 patients in the Control and 37 in the Treatment groups. The demographics between groups were similar. There was a 74% reduction in in-hospital complications in the Treatment group (10.8% vs 41.7%, P = 0.0051), 27% reduction in the length of stay (24.8 vs 33.8 days, P = 0.0103), and a 78% reduction in the number of open wounds at 3 months (5.4 vs 25%, P = -0.0481). Recurrent wounds and history of previous surgery were risk factors for complications. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy shortens hospital stay, number of postoperative complications, and the number of recurrent open wounds at 3 months after reconstructive pressure ulcer surgery, resulting in significant cost savings., (© 2018 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in preventing surgical site infection in obese women after caesarean section., Design: A cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside a clinical trial., Setting: Five obstetric departments in Denmark., Population: Women with a pregestational body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m 2 ., Method: We used data from a randomised controlled trial of 876 obese women who underwent elective or emergency caesarean section and were subsequently treated with iNPWT (n = 432) or a standard dressing (n = 444). Costs were estimated using data from four Danish National Databases and analysed from a healthcare perspective with a time horizon of 3 months after birth., Main Outcome Measures: Cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost per surgical site infection avoided and per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained., Results: The total healthcare costs per woman were €5793.60 for iNPWT and €5840.89 for standard dressings. Incisional NPWT was the dominant strategy because it was both less expensive and more effective; however, no statistically significant difference was found for costs or QALYs. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 92.8%. A subgroup analysis stratifying by BMI shows that the cost saving of the intervention was mainly driven by the benefit to women with a pre-pregnancy BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 ., Conclusion: Incisional NPWT appears to be cost saving compared with standard dressings but this finding is not statistically significant. The cost savings were primarily found in women with a pre-pregnancy BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 ., Tweetable Abstract: Prophylactic incisional NPWT reduces the risk of SSI after caesarean section and is probably dominant compared with standard dressings #healtheconomics., (© 2018 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

Background: Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). While existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT remains uncertain, new trials necessitated an updated review of the evidence for the effects of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure., Objectives: To assess the effects of negative pressure wound therapy for preventing surgical site infection in wounds healing through primary closure., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus in February 2018. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and checked reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions on language, publication date, or setting., Selection Criteria: We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another type of NPWT., Data Collection and Analysis: Four review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and quality assessment according to GRADE methodology., Main Results: In this second update we added 25 intervention trials, resulting in a total of 30 intervention trials (2957 participants), and two economic studies nested in trials. Surgeries included abdominal and colorectal (n = 5); caesarean section (n = 5); knee or hip arthroplasties (n = 5); groin surgery (n = 5); fractures (n = 5); laparotomy (n = 1); vascular surgery (n = 1); sternotomy (n = 1); breast reduction mammoplasty (n = 1); and mixed (n = 1). In three key domains four studies were at low risk of bias; six studies were at high risk of bias; and 20 studies were at unclear risk of bias. We judged the evidence to be of low or very low certainty for all outcomes, downgrading the level of the evidence on the basis of risk of bias and imprecision.Primary outcomesThree studies reported mortality (416 participants; follow-up 30 to 90 days or unspecified). It is uncertain whether NPWT has an impact on risk of death compared with standard dressings (risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 1.56; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded once for serious risk of bias and twice for very serious imprecision).Twenty-five studies reported on SSI. The evidence from 23 studies (2533 participants; 2547 wounds; follow-up 30 days to 12 months or unspecified) showed that NPWT may reduce the rate of SSIs (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.85; low-certainty evidence, downgraded twice for very serious risk of bias).Fourteen studies reported dehiscence. We combined results from 12 studies (1507 wounds; 1475 participants; follow-up 30 days to an average of 113 days or unspecified) that compared NPWT with standard dressings. It is uncertain whether NPWT reduces the risk of wound dehiscence compared with standard dressings (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.18; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded twice for very serious risk of bias and once for serious imprecision).Secondary outcomesWe are uncertain whether NPWT increases or decreases reoperation rates when compared with a standard dressing (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.63; 6 trials; 1021 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious risk of bias and serious imprecision) or if there is any clinical benefit associated with NPWT for reducing wound-related readmission to hospital within 30 days (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.57; 7 studies; 1271 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious risk of bias and serious imprecision). It is also uncertain whether NPWT reduces incidence of seroma compared with standard dressings (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00; 6 studies; 568 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded twice for very serious risk of bias and once for serious imprecision). It is uncertain if NPWT reduces or increases the risk of haematoma when compared with a standard dressing (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.42; 6 trials; 831 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded twice for very serious risk of bias and twice for very serious imprecision. It is uncertain if there is a higher risk of developing blisters when NPWT is compared with a standard dressing (RR 6.64, 95% CI 3.16 to 13.95; 6 studies; 597 participants; very low-certainty evidence, downgraded twice for very serious risk of bias and twice for very serious imprecision).Quality of life was not reported separately by group but was used in two economic evaluations to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). There was no clear difference in incremental QALYs for NPWT relative to standard dressing when results from the two trials were combined (mean difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.00; moderate-certainty evidence).One trial concluded that NPWT may be more cost-effective than standard care, estimating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value of GBP 20.65 per QALY gained. A second cost-effectiveness study estimated that when compared with standard dressings NPWT was cost saving and improved QALYs. We rated the overall quality of the reports as very good; we did not grade the evidence beyond this as it was based on modelling assumptions., Authors' Conclusions: Despite the addition of 25 trials, results are consistent with our earlier review, with the evidence judged to be of low or very low certainty for all outcomes. Consequently, uncertainty remains about whether NPWT compared with a standard dressing reduces or increases the incidence of important outcomes such as mortality, dehiscence, seroma, or if it increases costs. Given the cost and widespread use of NPWT for SSI prophylaxis, there is an urgent need for larger, well-designed and well-conducted trials to evaluate the effects of newer NPWT products designed for use on clean, closed surgical incisions. Such trials should initially focus on wounds that may be difficult to heal, such as sternal wounds or incisions on obese patients.

Background: Skin cancer rates in New Zealand are estimated to be the highest in the world. Split-skin grafting is a common procedure after skin cancer excision in the lower limb. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with same-day discharge in patients undergoing split-skin grafting of the lower limb for the treatment of skin cancer., Materials and Methods: Using effectiveness and quality of life data from a blinded, randomized single-center trial, a decision analytic model was developed from the perspective of the New Zealand hospital health-care buyer. The patient population included adults aged >18 y undergoing elective removal of lower limb skin cancer who were deemed able to manage a portable negative pressure device at home. A deterministic cost-effectiveness model was constructed using cost and utility data from our single-center Wound outcomes in negative pressure dressing (WOUND) trial. Forty-nine patients were randomized to receive either a negative pressure dressing applied in theater with same-day discharge home or a traditional bolster dressing with 5 d of inpatient bed rest. Patients were followed up for 3 mo to assess the mean percentage of graft take and complications. Quality of life was assessed through a EuroQoL questionnaire at 5-7 d. Cost data were collected directly from hospital records for each patient. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to characterize uncertainty., Results: Compared with standard dressing, NPWT resulted in an average cost saving of $3903.28 per treatment and a disutility of 0.083. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 25,000 New Zealand dollars, the incremental net benefit is $1828.27, indicating that NPWT is a cost-effective treatment option. The probability of NPWT being cost-effective was 73.15%., Conclusions: NPWT and same-day discharge in the appropriately selected patient is a cost-effective treatment compared with standard care., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is an established method for the faster wound healing of chronic non-healing wounds. It is also used for laparostomy wounds and healing of split skin grafts. The commercially available machine and the consumables for NPWT are very expensive and economically not feasible in developing and underdeveloped countries. So, we devised a NPWT system for wounds of the extremity using inexpensive, readily available materials in any hospital. The materials used are sterile glove, autoclaved sponge, Foley catheter, and a wall suction unit. The sponge was placed over the wound, and a sterile glove was pulled over it. A Foley catheter was placed over the sponge and taken out through one of the fingers of the glove. Adhesive plaster was used to air-seal the glove. The Foley catheter was fixed with silk ties and connected to wall suction. Granulation and wound healing was faster in this system. This system was safe and inexpensive for the treatment of wounds of the extremity., (© 2018 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Use of ultra-portable, mechanically powered disposable negative pressure wound therapy (dNPWT) has grown as an adjunctive modality to manage wounds in outpatient care and to expedite transition of inpatients to an outpatient setting. This technology has demonstrated similar efficacy and usability for mobile outpatients when compared with electrically powered negative pressure wound therapy devices. It was designed for patients with smaller, low to moderately exudating wounds and does not require batteries or a power source. However, very few studies address best practices for using dNPWT in a variety of wound types. There is a need for comprehensive clinical recommendations to better direct clinicians and patients in using this therapy. In addition, it is critical that providers are knowledgeable about processes for obtaining reimbursement for placement of dNPWT since codes and procedures differ drastically from standard NPWT. A panel meeting of experts with a high level of experience with dNPWT in varied wound types was convened to develop clinical recommendations and summarize current US reimbursement coding guidelines for the use of dNPWT. This publication summarizes the recommendations from panel members, in addition to supporting evidence, to help guide appropriate use of dNPWT. Panel recommendations regarding optimal patient and wound selection, wound preparation, proper patient training, and use of dNPWT in various wound types are included as well as clinical techniques for dressing application, bridging under offloading devices and compression, maintaining a seal, and protecting intact skin. Processes and codes for obtaining reimbursement for dNPWT are reviewed by care setting. Clinical recommendations and reimbursement guidelines summarized in this publication are meant to provide direction to clinicians in using dNPWT that potentially could translate into improved clinical and economic value.

Introduction: Patient nonadherence to home care treatment poses an obstacle to wound healing that can lead to additional costs and prolong care., Objective: This retrospective pilot study examines the potential time and cost savings associated with a remote therapy monitoring (RTM) program designed to improve negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) adherence in the home care setting., Materials and Methods: Payor claims data of patients receiving NPWT with (n = 199) or without (n = 232) RTM between January 1 and June 30, 2017 were analyzed., Results: The RTM patients were significantly older (P = .0401), had a higher percentage of Medicare Advantage plans (P = .0015), and had a higher mean Charleston Comorbidity Index score (P = .0115) than non-RTM patients. For both groups, chronic wounds had higher 90-day wound-related costs than acute wounds. The median length of treatment for RTM patients was shorter than non-RTM patients (P = .0394). Mean 90-day wound-related costs for RTM and non-RTM patients were $10 515 and $12 158, respectively., Conclusions: These results build upon previous studies of RTM-assisted outpatient NPWT and suggest an opportunity for wound care cost savings.

In this review, we assess the effects of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) following primary hip and knee replacement surgery with a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint, and Muscle Trauma Group's Specialized Registry on June 12, 2018; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2018, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE (1946-2018); and Embase (1980-2018). To identify RCTs, we combined a subject-specific search strategy with a sensitivity-maximizing version of the Cochrane highly sensitive search strategy. Included were RCTs and quasi-RCTs that compare NPWT with other treatments or no treatment following primary hip and knee replacements. We excluded trials that were focused on patients undergoing revision hip or knee replacements or who had pathological bone disease or periprosthetic fractures. Five RCTs met the inclusion criteria and are included in this review, making a total of 382 patients with primary total hip/knee replacements. Included trials were of varying quality, with little consistency in control groups or outcome measures; therefore, a meta-analysis could not be performed. Overall, three RCTs reported no significant differences in primary outcomes after NPWT, in comparison to standard or conventional wound care. One trial reported significant reduction in wound seroma size in patients undergoing primary hip replacements after NPWT, compared to standard dressings (NPWT, 1.97 vs. 5.08 mL [p = 0.021]; n = 19). Finally, one trial that compared NPWT with standard dressings following primary hip/knee replacements (n = 209) reported statistically significant differences that favored NPWT for overall reduction in length of hospital stay (mean difference, 0.9 d, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.2-2.5; p = 0.07), number of dressing changes (mean difference, 1.7; 95% CI, 0.8-2.5; p = 0.002), and a fourfold reduction in reported postoperative surgical wound complications (8.4% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.06). Cost-effectiveness quality adjusted life years showed greater savings for higher-risk patients (body mass index ≥ 35; ASA ≥ 3). We find no justification for applying NPWT to all postoperative wounds after routine total hip and knee replacement; however, NPWT may benefit selected patients who are at high risk for wound complications.

Background: Breast cancer accounts for 30% of all new cancer diagnoses in women. Although more options are now available regarding breast reconstruction, the risk of complications (eg, infection, dehiscence, and expander exposure) is also prevalent and must be considered when choosing a reconstruction option because the cost for complications can be substantial., Methods: A hypothetical cost model was applied to clinical outcomes of a previous retrospective study comparing the use of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy (ciNPT) and standard of care (SOC) over breast incisions after immediate reconstruction. The adjusted complication cost for a mastectomy with reconstruction was a mean of $10,402 and was calculated using a database of inpatient, outpatient, and carrier claims., Results: The previous retrospective study included data on 665 breasts (ciNPT = 331, SOC = 334) and 356 female patients (ciNPT = 177, SOC = 179) and reported on complication rates at the breast level: 8.5% (28/331) for the ciNPT breast group versus 15.9% (53/334) for the SOC group (P = 0.0092). In the ciNPT group, 24/177 patients (13.6%) had a complication, whereas in the SOC group, 38/179 patients (21.2%) had a complication. Based on the adjusted mean complication cost of $10,402, total complication cost for the ciNPT group was $250,000 versus $395,000 for the SOC group with a per-patient cost savings of $218.00 with ciNPT., Conclusion: The authors' preliminary findings show potential cost savings with the use of ciNPT over breast incisions and warrant further study regarding the cost-effectiveness of ciNPT compared with standard of care after immediate breast reconstruction.

Negative pressure wound therapy, a tool widely applied to treat lower limb traumas, is useful in reconstructive procedures. However, obtaining an airtight vacuum seal when using a negative pressure dressing around an external fixation device can be complicated and time-consuming. The plastic drape seldom adheres to screws, pins, or wires and, as such, the vacuum seal is jeopardized. In surgical departments, colostomy paste is widely used, readily available, and applied where pins and wires make contact with the plastic drape. It is a fast, practical, and inexpensive method of preventing air leakage. In conclusion, to obtain an airtight seal between the skin and an external fixation device, colostomy paste may be used to ensure an optimal tight seal, even for complex and extended wounds, for 3-5 days without complications or the requirement for additional dressing changes. Furthermore, it is inexpensive, readily available, simple to use, and quick to apply.

Objective: Vascular groin incision complications contribute significantly to patients' morbidity and rising health care costs. Negative pressure therapy over the closed incision decreases the infection rate in cardiac and orthopedic procedures. This study prospectively evaluated negative pressure therapy as a means to decrease wound complications and associated health care costs., Methods: This was a randomized, prospective, single-institution study of 119 femoral incisions closed primarily after elective vascular surgery including both inflow (eg, aortofemoral) and outflow (eg, femoral-popliteal bypass) procedures. Incisions were categorized as high risk for wound complications on the basis of body mass index >30 kg/m 2 , pannus, reoperation, prosthetic graft, poor nutrition, immunosuppression, or hemoglobin A 1c >8% and randomized 1:1 to standard gauze (n = 60) dressing vs negative pressure therapy (Prevena [Acelity, San Antonio, Tex], n = 59). Wound complication rate, length of stay (LOS), reoperation, readmission, and variable hospital costs were determined during 30 days. Statistical analysis was performed using χ 2 test along with a two-sample unpaired t-test for continuous variables., Results: There were no significant demographic differences (age, sex, risk factors for wound complication) between the two high-risk groups. In low-risk controls, the major wound complication rate was 4.8% (involving one infection in 21 incisions), resulting in a 3.8-day LOS, 4.8% reoperation, 4.8% readmission rate, and $17,599 in average variable cost. For high-risk controls, there was a significant increase in major wound complications to 25% (including all 12 infections in 60 incisions), LOS (10.6 days), reoperation (18.3%), readmission (16.7%), and costs ($36,537). Finally, negative pressure therapy significantly reduced major wound complications to 8.5% (including five of six infections in 59 incisions; P < .001), reoperation (8.5%; P < .05), and readmission (6.8%; P < .04) but not LOS (10.6 days). The average variable cost was reduced ($30,492), yielding an average savings of $6045 per patient (P = .11)., Conclusions: This study suggests that negative pressure therapy significantly reduces the major wound complication, reoperation, and readmission rates for patients at high risk for groin wound complications. Furthermore, this therapy may lead to a reduction in hospital costs. Negative pressure therapy for all groin incisions considered at high risk for wound complications is recommended., (Copyright © 2018 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a growing interest in using negative pressure wound therapy in closed surgical incision to prevent wound complications which continue to persist following surgery despite advances in infection measures., Objectives: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of single use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) compared to standard of care in patients following coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) procedure to reduce surgical site complications (SSC) defined as dehiscence and sternotomy infections., Method: A decision analytic model was developed from the Germany Statutory Health Insurance payer's perspective over a 12-week time horizon. Baseline data on SSC, revision operations, length of stay, and readmissions were obtained from a prospective observational study of 2621 CABG patients in Germany. Effectiveness data for sNPWT was taken from a randomised open label trial conducted in Poland which randomised 80 patients to treatment with either sNPWT or standard care. Cost data (in Euros) were taken from the relevant diagnostic related groups and published literature., Results: The clinical study reported an increase in wounds that healed without complications 37/40 (92.5%) in the sNPWT compared to 30/40 (75%) patients in the SC group p = 0.03. The model estimated sNPWT resulted in 0.989 complications avoided compared to 0.952 and the estimated quality adjusted life years were 0.8904 and 0.8593 per patient compared to standard care. The estimated mean cost per patient was €19,986 for sNPWT compared to €20,572 for SC resulting in cost-saving of €586. The findings were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses., Conclusion: The sNPWT can be considered a cost saving intervention that reduces surgical site complications following CABG surgery compared to standard care. We however recommend that additional economic studies should be conducted as new evidence on the use of sNPWT in CABG patients becomes available to validate the results of this economic analysis.

Introduction: Patients with closed high-energy injuries associated with major trauma have surprisingly high rates of surgical site infection in incisions created during fracture fixation. One factor that may reduce the risk of surgical site infection is the type of dressing applied over the closed surgical incision. In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, negative-pressure wound therapy will be compared with standard dressings with outcomes of deep infection, quality of life, pain and disability., Methods and Analysis: Adult patients presenting to hospital within 72 hours of sustaining major trauma, requiring a surgical incision to treat a fractured lower limb, are eligible for inclusion. Randomisation, stratified by trial centre, open/closed fracture at presentation and Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≤15 versus ISS ≥16 will be administered via a secure web-based service using minimisation. The random allocation will be to either standard wound management or negative-pressure wound therapy.Trial participants will usually have clinical follow-up at the local fracture clinic for a minimum of 6 months, as per standard National Health Service practice. Diagnosis of deep infection will be recorded at 30 days. Functional, pain and quality of life outcome data will be collected using the Disability Rating Index, Douleur Neuropathique Questionnaire and Euroqol - 5 Dimension - 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at 3 months and 6 months postinjury. Further data will be captured on resource use and any late postoperative complications.Longer term outcomes will be assessed annually for 5 years and reported separately., Ethics and Dissemination: National Research Ethics Committee approved this study on 16 February 2016 16/WM/0006.The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment monograph and a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal will be submitted on completion of this trial. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment of this injury., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN12702354; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MLC is a member of the UK NIHR HTA General Board., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)