Closed‐incision negative pressure therapy at −125 mmHg significantly reduces surgical site complications following total hip and knee arthroplasties: A stratified meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Closed‐incision negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPT) has shown promising effects for managing infected wounds. This meta‐analysis explores the current state of knowledge on ciNPT in orthopedics and addresses whether ciNPT at −125 mmHg or −80 mmHg or conventional dressing reduces the incidence of surgical site complications in hip and knee arthroplasty. METHODS: This meta‐analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and Cochrane Handbook. Prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ciNPT use compared to conventional dressings following hip and knee surgeries were considered for inclusion. Non‐stratified and stratified meta‐analyses of six RCTs were conducted to test for confounding and biases. A P value less than .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The included six RCTs have 611 patients. Total hip and knee arthroplasties were performed for 51.7% and 48.2% of the included population, respectively. Of 611 patients, conventional dressings were applied in 315 patients and 296 patients received ciNPT. Two ciNPT systems have been used across the six RCTs; PREVENA Incision Management System (−125 mmHg) (63.1%) and PICO dressing (−80 mmHg) (36.8%). The non‐stratified analysis showed that the ciNPT system had a statistically significant, lower risk of persistent wound drainage as compared to conventional dressing following total hip and knee arthroplasties (OR = 0.28; P = .002). There was no difference between ciNPT and conventional dressings in terms of wound hematoma, blistering, seroma, and dehiscence. The stratified meta‐analysis indicated that patients undergoing treatment with high‐pressure ciNPT (120 mmHg) displayed significantly fewer overall complications and persistent wound drainage (P = .00001 and P = .002, respectively) when compared to low‐pressure ciNPT (80 mmHg) and conventional dressings. In addition, ciNPT is associated with shorter hospital stays. (P = .005). CONCLUSION: When compared to conventional wound dressing and −80 mmHg ciNPT, the use of −125 mmHg ciNPT is recommended in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty.