Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Mar;133(3):722-726.
doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000438046.83515.6a.

Randomized clinical trial to compare negative-pressure wound therapy approaches with low and high pressure, silicone-coated dressing, and polyurethane foam dressing

Lawrence A Lavery  1 , Javier La Fontaine, Gaurav Thakral, Paul J Kim, Kavita Bhavan, Kathryn E Davis
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized clinical trial to compare negative-pressure wound therapy approaches with low and high pressure, silicone-coated dressing, and polyurethane foam dressing

Lawrence A Lavery et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 Mar.

Abstract

Background: This study was designed to compare two approaches to negative-pressure wound therapy: 125-mmHg pressure with a polyurethane foam dressing and 75-mmHg pressure with a silicone-coated dressing.

Methods: Forty patients with diabetic foot wounds, after incision and drainage or amputation for infection, were assigned randomly to negative-pressure wound therapy with 75-mmHg continuous pressure with a silicone-covered dressing (75-mmHg group) or 125-mmHg with a polyurethane foam dressing (125-mmHg group) for up to 4 weeks or until surgical closure.

Results: There was no difference in the proportion of wounds that were closed surgically (75-mmHg group, 50 percent; 125-mmHg group, 60 percent), wounds that demonstrated 50 percent wound area reduction (75-mmHg group, 65 percent; 125-mmHg group, 80 percent), or wounds that demonstrated 50 percent wound volume reduction after 4 weeks of therapy (75-mmHg group, 95 percent; 125-mmHg group, 90 percent).

Conclusion: The authors' results suggest that there was no difference in outcomes in wounds treated with low pressure (75 mmHg) with a silicone-coated interface and high pressure (125 mmHg) with a polyurethane foam interface.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, II.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Blume PA, Walters J, Payne W, Ayala J, Lantis J. Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy using vacuum-assisted closure with advanced moist wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:631–636
    1. Morykwas MJ, Argenta LC, Shelton-Brown EI, McGuirt W. Vacuum-assisted closure: A new method for wound control and treatment. Animal studies and basic foundation. Ann Plast Surg. 1997;38:553–562
    1. Borgquist O, Ingemansson R, Malmsjö M. The influence of low and high pressure levels during negative-pressure wound therapy on wound contraction and fluid evacuation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:551–559
    1. Borgquist O, Ingemansson R, Malmsjö M. Wound edge microvascular blood flow during negative-pressure wound therapy: Examining the effects of pressures from -10 to -175 mmHg. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:502–509
    1. Borgquist O, Anesäter E, Hedström E, Lee CK, Ingemansson R, Malmsjö M. Measurements of wound edge microvascular blood flow during negative pressure wound therapy using thermodiffusion and transcutaneous and invasive laser Doppler velocimetry. Wound Repair Regen. 2011;19:727–733

Publication types