scholarly journals Effect of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy vs Standard Wound Management on 12-Month Disability Among Adults With Severe Open Fracture of the Lower Limb

JAMA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 319 (22) ◽  
pp. 2280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Costa ◽  
Juul Achten ◽  
Julie Bruce ◽  
Elizabeth Tutton ◽  
Stavros Petrou ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-66
Author(s):  
Nusrat Shaheed ◽  
A S M Jahangir Chowdhury ◽  
Anadi Ranjan Mondal ◽  
Amal Chandra Paul ◽  
Md Shahin Akhter ◽  
...  

Wound management is a major concern in open fracture cases. Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) is an  advanced method for managing open wounds. It is a topical treatment using sub-atmospheric pressure to increase  blood flow, remove bacteria and increase growth of granulation tissue in the wound. The study was performed to  evaluate the results of NPWT in patients with open fracture in lower extremity. Using Aquarium pump as an NPWT  device, 16 patients were prospectly treated for open fractures in their inferior extremity. Mean patients' age range was  21 to 60 yrs. The patients under study either had suffered from trauma, fall or had post operative wound infection.  Many of them had wounds with underlying tendon or bone exposure. Necrotic tissues were debrided before applying  NPWT. Dressings were changed every 3rd or 4th day and treatments were continued for 07 to 28 days. Exposed  tendons and bones were successfully covered with healthy granulation tissue in all cases, depth of the wounds  reduced as well as surface areas. In 12 cases coverage of granulation tissue were achieved and further managed by  skin grafting, 4 cases with wound infections were closed with secondary suture. No significant complications were  noted regarding the treatment. NPWT was found to facilitate the rapid formation of healthy granulation tissue on  open wounds in lower extremity and thus to shorten healing time and minimize secondary soft tissue defect coverage  procedures. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/fmcj.v7i2.13500 Faridpur Med. Coll. J. 2012;7(2):63-66


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (73) ◽  
pp. 1-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew L Costa ◽  
Juul Achten ◽  
Julie Bruce ◽  
Sonia Davis ◽  
Susie Hennings ◽  
...  

Background Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin and is exposed to the outside environment. These are life-changing injuries. The risk of deep infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgical debridement could potentially reduce the risk of infection in the open-fracture wound. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, quality of life and resource use in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) versus standard wound management after the first surgical debridement of the wound. Design A pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial. Setting Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals in the UK Major Trauma Network. Participants A total of 460 patients aged ≥ 16 years with a severe open fracture of the lower limb were recruited from July 2012 through to December 2015. Patients were excluded if they presented more than 72 hours after their injury or were unable to complete questionnaires. Interventions Negative-pressure wound therapy (n = 226) where an ‘open-cell’ solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the wound and connected to a suction pump which created a partial vacuum over the dressing versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure (n = 234). Main outcome measures Disability Rating Index (DRI) – a score of 0 (no disability) to 100 (completely disabled) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. The secondary outcomes were deep infection, quality of life and resource use collected at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months post randomisaton. Results There was no evidence of a difference in the patients’ DRI at 12 months. The mean DRI in the NPWT group was 45.5 points [standard deviation (SD) 28.0 points] versus 42.4 points (SD 24.2 points) in the standard dressing group, giving a difference of –3.9 points (95% confidence interval –8.9 to 1.2 points) in favour of standard dressings (p = 0.132). There was no difference in HRQoL and no difference in the number of surgical site infections or other complications at any point in the 12 months after surgery. NPWT did not reduce the cost of treatment and it was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness. Limitations Owing to the emergency nature of the interventions, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised into the trial would subsequently be unable or unwilling to take part. Such post-randomisation withdrawal of patients could have posed a risk to the external validity of the trial. However, the great majority of these patients (85%) were found to be ineligible after randomisation. Therefore, we can be confident that the patients who took part were representative of the population with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Conclusions Contrary to the existing literature and current clinical guidelines, NPWT dressings do not provide a clinical or an economic benefit for patients with an open fracture of the lower limb. Future work Future work should investigate alternative strategies to reduce the incidence of infection and improve outcomes for patients with an open fracture of the lower limb. Two specific areas of potentially great benefit are (1) the use of topical antibiotic preparations in the open-fracture wound and (2) the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33756652 and UKCRN Portfolio ID 11783. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. k4411
Author(s):  
Rob Cook ◽  
Vaughan Thomas ◽  
Rosie Martin

The study Effect of negative pressure wound therapy vs standard wound management on 12-month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb: the WOLLF randomised clinical trial. Costa ML, Achten J, Bruce J, et al; UK WOLLF Collaboration Published on 9 October 2018 JAMA 2018;319:2280-8. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 10/57/20). To read the full NIHR Signal, go to: https://discover.dc.nihr.ac.uk/content/signal-000655/negative-pressure-dressings-are-no-better-than-standard-dressings-for-open-fractures


Redox Biology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 307-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Lucien Bellot ◽  
Xiaoke Dong ◽  
Amitabha Lahiri ◽  
Sandeep Jacob Sebastin ◽  
Ines Batinic-Haberle ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (38) ◽  
pp. 1-86
Author(s):  
Matthew L Costa ◽  
Juul Achten ◽  
Ruth Knight ◽  
May Ee Png ◽  
Julie Bruce ◽  
...  

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 101-B (11) ◽  
pp. 1392-1401 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Petrou ◽  
B. Parker ◽  
J. Masters ◽  
J. Achten ◽  
J. Bruce ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document