Association of negative pressure wound therapy and surgical site infections in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery: An entropy balanced analysis
- PMID: 39155656
- DOI: 10.1002/jso.27828
Association of negative pressure wound therapy and surgical site infections in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery: An entropy balanced analysis
Abstract
Background and objectives: Surgical site infections (SSIs) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are a major cause of potentially avoidable morbidity. We explored the association of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with SSI in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.
Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC for non-gynecologic cancers. Exposure was the receipt of NPWT versus traditional skin closure. Primary outcome was SSI within 90 days of surgery. We performed multivariable logistic regression (before and after entropy balancing) to evaluate the association of exposure with outcomes.
Results: A total of 251 patients were included, of which 43 (17%) received NPWT and 26 (10.4%) developed SSIs. Baseline demographics and clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between the two groups with some exceptions: Patients who received NPWT had a higher Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index (median 19 vs. 11, p = 0.002) and operative time (10 vs. 8.2 h, p = 0.003) but were less likely to undergo HIPEC (84% vs. 95%, p < 0.05). After entropy balancing, on multivariable logistic regression, NPWT was not associated with 90-day SSI (odds ratio = 0.90; 95% confidence interval = 0.21-3.80; p = 0.89).
Conclusion: NPWT was not associated with a reduction in SSIs. These findings prompt a reevaluation of the routine use of NPWT in CRS/HIPEC.
Keywords: NPWT; cytoreductive surgery; negative‐pressure wound therapy; surgical site infection; vacuum assisted closure.
© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Sullivan E, Gupta A, Cook CH. Cost and consequences of surgical site infections: a call to arms. Surg Infect. 2017;18(4):451‐454. doi:10.1089/sur.2017.072
-
- Broex ECJ, van Asselt ADI, Bruggeman CA, van Tiel FH. Surgical site infections: how high are the costs? J Hosp Infect. 2009;72(3):193‐201. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2009.03.020
-
- Sparling KW, Ryckman FC, Schoettker PJ, et al. Financial impact of failing to prevent surgical site infections. Qual Manag Health Care. 2007;16(3):219‐225. doi:10.1097/01.QMH.0000281058.99929.ea
-
- Hirani S, Trivedi NA, Chauhan J, Chauhan Y. A study of clinical and economic burden of surgical site infection in patients undergoing caesarian section at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. PLoS One. 2022;17(6):e0269530. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269530
-
- D'Angelica MI, Ellis RJ, Liu JB, et al. Piperacillin‐tazobactam compared with cefoxitin as antimicrobial prophylaxis for pancreatoduodenectomy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;329(18):1579‐1588. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.5728
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
