Cargando…

Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of different negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) devices and NPWT with and without simultaneous irrigation in patients admitted to hospital with moderate and severe foot infections. Ninety patients were randomized in a 12‐week prospective, randomi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davis, Kathryn E., La Fontaine, Javier, Farrar, David, Oz, Orhan K., Crisologo, Peter A., Berriman, Sandra, Lavery, Lawrence A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6973291/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31245901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12741
_version_ 1783490013916299264
author Davis, Kathryn E.
La Fontaine, Javier
Farrar, David
Oz, Orhan K.
Crisologo, Peter A.
Berriman, Sandra
Lavery, Lawrence A.
author_facet Davis, Kathryn E.
La Fontaine, Javier
Farrar, David
Oz, Orhan K.
Crisologo, Peter A.
Berriman, Sandra
Lavery, Lawrence A.
author_sort Davis, Kathryn E.
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of different negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) devices and NPWT with and without simultaneous irrigation in patients admitted to hospital with moderate and severe foot infections. Ninety patients were randomized in a 12‐week prospective, randomized noninferiority trial to compare wound healing in patients with moderate and severe infected foot wounds treated with NPWT after surgery. Inclusion criteria included ABI > 0.5 or toe pressures >30 PVR/mmHg, >18 years of age and exclusion included active Charcot arthropathy, collagen vascular disease, HIV, and hypercoagulable state. We compared two different traditional devices, NPWT‐K (KCI, VAC Ulta) and NPWT‐C (Cardinal, PRO), and NPWT‐I with saline irrigation (Cardinal, PRO). All patients had therapy delivered at 125 mmHg continuous pressure. In patients who received simultaneous saline irrigation (NPWT‐I), the administration rate was 15 ml per hour. The primary outcome was the proportion of healed wounds in 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included surgical wound closure, number of surgeries, length of stay, and time to wound healing. Continuous data was presented as mean ± standard deviation. Analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables and chi‐square to compare dichotomous variables with an alpha of 0.05. There were no differences in outcomes among NPWT‐I, NPWT‐C, and NPWT‐K groups in proportion of healed wounds (63.3%, 50.0%, 46.7% p = 0.39), surgical wound closure (83.3%, 80.0%, 63.3%, p = 0.15), number of surgeries (2.0 ± 0.49, 2.4 ± 0.77, 2.4 ± 0.68, p = 0.06), length of stay (16.3 ± 15.7, 14.7 ± 7.4, 15.3 ± 10.5 days, p = 0.87), time to wound healing (46.2 ± 22.8, 40.9 ± 18.8, 45.9 ± 28.3 days, p = 0.78). We did not identify any significant differences in clinical outcomes or adverse events between patients treated with different NPWT devices or NPWT with and without irrigation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6973291
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69732912020-01-28 Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections Davis, Kathryn E. La Fontaine, Javier Farrar, David Oz, Orhan K. Crisologo, Peter A. Berriman, Sandra Lavery, Lawrence A. Wound Repair Regen Original Research‐Clinical Science The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of different negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) devices and NPWT with and without simultaneous irrigation in patients admitted to hospital with moderate and severe foot infections. Ninety patients were randomized in a 12‐week prospective, randomized noninferiority trial to compare wound healing in patients with moderate and severe infected foot wounds treated with NPWT after surgery. Inclusion criteria included ABI > 0.5 or toe pressures >30 PVR/mmHg, >18 years of age and exclusion included active Charcot arthropathy, collagen vascular disease, HIV, and hypercoagulable state. We compared two different traditional devices, NPWT‐K (KCI, VAC Ulta) and NPWT‐C (Cardinal, PRO), and NPWT‐I with saline irrigation (Cardinal, PRO). All patients had therapy delivered at 125 mmHg continuous pressure. In patients who received simultaneous saline irrigation (NPWT‐I), the administration rate was 15 ml per hour. The primary outcome was the proportion of healed wounds in 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included surgical wound closure, number of surgeries, length of stay, and time to wound healing. Continuous data was presented as mean ± standard deviation. Analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables and chi‐square to compare dichotomous variables with an alpha of 0.05. There were no differences in outcomes among NPWT‐I, NPWT‐C, and NPWT‐K groups in proportion of healed wounds (63.3%, 50.0%, 46.7% p = 0.39), surgical wound closure (83.3%, 80.0%, 63.3%, p = 0.15), number of surgeries (2.0 ± 0.49, 2.4 ± 0.77, 2.4 ± 0.68, p = 0.06), length of stay (16.3 ± 15.7, 14.7 ± 7.4, 15.3 ± 10.5 days, p = 0.87), time to wound healing (46.2 ± 22.8, 40.9 ± 18.8, 45.9 ± 28.3 days, p = 0.78). We did not identify any significant differences in clinical outcomes or adverse events between patients treated with different NPWT devices or NPWT with and without irrigation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2019-06-27 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC6973291/ /pubmed/31245901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12741 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Wound Repair and Regeneration published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of by the Wound Healing Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research‐Clinical Science
Davis, Kathryn E.
La Fontaine, Javier
Farrar, David
Oz, Orhan K.
Crisologo, Peter A.
Berriman, Sandra
Lavery, Lawrence A.
Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title_full Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title_fullStr Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title_full_unstemmed Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title_short Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
title_sort randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections
topic Original Research‐Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6973291/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31245901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12741
work_keys_str_mv AT daviskathryne randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT lafontainejavier randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT farrardavid randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT ozorhank randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT crisologopetera randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT berrimansandra randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections
AT laverylawrencea randomizedclinicalstudytocomparenegativepressurewoundtherapywithsimultaneoussalineirrigationandtraditionalnegativepressurewoundtherapyforcomplexfootinfections