Cargando…

A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology

Objective: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to be effective in the management of chronic and surgical wounds. The two most widely used modalities of NPWT are vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C.) therapy (KCI, Inc., San Antonio, Texas) and the RENASYS NPWT system (Smith & Nephew,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hurd, Theresa, Rossington, Alan, Trueman, Paul, Smith, Jennifer
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220569/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28116226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/wound.2015.0679
_version_ 1782492648128380928
author Hurd, Theresa
Rossington, Alan
Trueman, Paul
Smith, Jennifer
author_facet Hurd, Theresa
Rossington, Alan
Trueman, Paul
Smith, Jennifer
author_sort Hurd, Theresa
collection PubMed
description Objective: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to be effective in the management of chronic and surgical wounds. The two most widely used modalities of NPWT are vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C.) therapy (KCI, Inc., San Antonio, Texas) and the RENASYS NPWT system (Smith & Nephew, Hull, United Kingdom). This evaluation compares the performance of the two systems in the management of wounds of mixed etiology. Approach: The evaluation is based on retrospective evaluation of more than 1,000 patients treated with NPWT in a community setting in Canada. Results: Patients were well matched according to their baseline characteristics, including age, sex, and wound characteristics. No difference was seen between the two NPWT systems in terms of the percentage of patients reaching their predetermined treatment goal (90.0% and 93.6%, respectively). The time taken to achieve the treatment goal (median 8 weeks in both groups), percentage reduction in wound area (64.2% and 65.3%, respectively), and weekly rate of reduction in wound area (9.7% and 9.4%, respectively; p = 0.156). Innovation: This evaluation is believed to comprise the largest cohort of patients treated with NPWT published to date and is one of the few studies that have attempted to provide a direct comparison of the performance of alternative NPWT systems. Conclusion: Findings suggest that there are no clinically meaningful differences in the efficacy and performance of the two most widely used NPWT devices, based on consideration of a number of wound outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5220569
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52205692017-01-23 A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology Hurd, Theresa Rossington, Alan Trueman, Paul Smith, Jennifer Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) Technology Advances Objective: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been shown to be effective in the management of chronic and surgical wounds. The two most widely used modalities of NPWT are vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C.) therapy (KCI, Inc., San Antonio, Texas) and the RENASYS NPWT system (Smith & Nephew, Hull, United Kingdom). This evaluation compares the performance of the two systems in the management of wounds of mixed etiology. Approach: The evaluation is based on retrospective evaluation of more than 1,000 patients treated with NPWT in a community setting in Canada. Results: Patients were well matched according to their baseline characteristics, including age, sex, and wound characteristics. No difference was seen between the two NPWT systems in terms of the percentage of patients reaching their predetermined treatment goal (90.0% and 93.6%, respectively). The time taken to achieve the treatment goal (median 8 weeks in both groups), percentage reduction in wound area (64.2% and 65.3%, respectively), and weekly rate of reduction in wound area (9.7% and 9.4%, respectively; p = 0.156). Innovation: This evaluation is believed to comprise the largest cohort of patients treated with NPWT published to date and is one of the few studies that have attempted to provide a direct comparison of the performance of alternative NPWT systems. Conclusion: Findings suggest that there are no clinically meaningful differences in the efficacy and performance of the two most widely used NPWT devices, based on consideration of a number of wound outcomes. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2017-01-01 2017-01-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5220569/ /pubmed/28116226 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/wound.2015.0679 Text en © Theresa Hurd et al. 2017; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Technology Advances
Hurd, Theresa
Rossington, Alan
Trueman, Paul
Smith, Jennifer
A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title_full A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title_fullStr A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title_full_unstemmed A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title_short A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology
title_sort retrospective comparison of the performance of two negative pressure wound therapy systems in the management of wounds of mixed etiology
topic Technology Advances
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5220569/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28116226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/wound.2015.0679
work_keys_str_mv AT hurdtheresa aretrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT rossingtonalan aretrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT truemanpaul aretrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT smithjennifer aretrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT hurdtheresa retrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT rossingtonalan retrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT truemanpaul retrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology
AT smithjennifer retrospectivecomparisonoftheperformanceoftwonegativepressurewoundtherapysystemsinthemanagementofwoundsofmixedetiology