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
. 2019 Mar;34(3):554-559.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.11.017. Epub 2018 Nov 17.

Use of Closed Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy After Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Patients at High Risk for Infection: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Use of Closed Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy After Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Patients at High Risk for Infection: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

Jared M Newman et al. J Arthroplasty. 2019 Mar.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Continuous wound drainage after arthroplasty can lead to the development of a periprosthetic joint infection. Closed incisional negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) has been reported to help alleviate drainage and other wound complications. The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled trial is to compare the use of ciNPWT with our standard of care dressing in revision arthroplasty patients who were at high risk to develop wound complications.

Methods: A total of 160 patients undergoing elective revision arthroplasty were prospectively randomized to receive either ciNPWT or a silver-impregnated occlusive dressing after surgery in a single institution. Patients were included if they had at least 1 risk factor for developing wound complication(s): wound complication, readmission, and reoperation rates were collected at 2, 4, and 12 weeks postoperatively.

Results: The postoperative wound complication rate was significantly higher in the control cohort compared to the ciNPWT cohort (19 [23.8%] vs 8 [10.1%], P = .022). There was no significant difference between the control and ciNPWT cohorts in terms of readmissions (19 [23.8%] vs 16 [20.3%], P = .595). Reoperation rate was higher in controls compared to ciNPWT patients (10 [12.5%] vs 2 [2.5%], P = .017). After adjusting for the history of a prior periprosthetic joint infection and inflammatory arthritis, the ciNPWT cohort had a significantly decreased wound complication rate (odds ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.68).

Conclusion: ciNPWT may decrease the rate of postoperative wound complications in patients who are at an increased risk of such wound issues after revision arthroplasty.

Keywords: arthroplasty; complications; infection; negative pressure wound therapy; revision; wound healing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types