EplastyPub Date : 2024-07-17eCollection Date: 2024-01-01
Devinder P Singh, Allen Gabriel, Ronald Silverman, Christine Bongards, Leah Griffin
{"title":"比较两种不同闭合切口负压系统在乳房手术中的效果及对护理成本的影响的 Meta 分析。","authors":"Devinder P Singh, Allen Gabriel, Ronald Silverman, Christine Bongards, Leah Griffin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical site complication (SSC) rates in breast surgery have been reported between 2.25% and 53%. Use of incision management may help reduce the risk of SSCs. The potential of 2 closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) systems to mitigate surgical site complications (SSC) and surgical site infections (SSI) in breast surgery were assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review for breast surgery studies was conducted comparing ciNPT use against standard of care (SOC). SSC, SSI, and dehiscence rates were examined. SSCs were defined as all surgical site complications including SSI, dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, and necrosis. Risk ratios and random effects models were used to assess the effect of ciNPT with multilayer absorbent dressing (ciNPT-MLA) and ciNPT with foam dressing (ciNPT-F) compared with SOC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight articles were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in SSC rates (<i>P</i> = .307) or SSI rates (<i>P</i> = .453) between ciNPT-MLA and SOC were observed. ciNPT-MLA use was associated with a reduction in dehiscence compared with SOC (RR = 0.499, 95% CI = 0.303, 0.822; <i>P</i> = .006). A significant reduction in SSC rates (RR = 0.498, 95% CI = 0.271, 0.917; <i>P</i> = .025) was observed with ciNPT-F use. Similarly, dehiscence rate reduction was associated with ciNPT-F use (RR = 0.349, 95% CI= 0.168, 0.725; <i>P</i> = .005). A trend towards reduction of SSI rates with ciNPT-F use compared with SOC was also noted (<i>P</i> = .053).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with SOC, ciNPT-MLA significantly reduced rates of dehiscence, while ciNPT-F use resulted in significantly reduced SSC and dehiscence rates with a trend toward reducing SSI.</p>","PeriodicalId":93993,"journal":{"name":"Eplasty","volume":"24 ","pages":"e40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367156/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Two Different Closed Incision Negative Pressure Systems in Breast Surgery and Implications to Cost of Care.\",\"authors\":\"Devinder P Singh, Allen Gabriel, Ronald Silverman, Christine Bongards, Leah Griffin\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical site complication (SSC) rates in breast surgery have been reported between 2.25% and 53%. Use of incision management may help reduce the risk of SSCs. The potential of 2 closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) systems to mitigate surgical site complications (SSC) and surgical site infections (SSI) in breast surgery were assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review for breast surgery studies was conducted comparing ciNPT use against standard of care (SOC). SSC, SSI, and dehiscence rates were examined. SSCs were defined as all surgical site complications including SSI, dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, and necrosis. Risk ratios and random effects models were used to assess the effect of ciNPT with multilayer absorbent dressing (ciNPT-MLA) and ciNPT with foam dressing (ciNPT-F) compared with SOC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight articles were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in SSC rates (<i>P</i> = .307) or SSI rates (<i>P</i> = .453) between ciNPT-MLA and SOC were observed. ciNPT-MLA use was associated with a reduction in dehiscence compared with SOC (RR = 0.499, 95% CI = 0.303, 0.822; <i>P</i> = .006). A significant reduction in SSC rates (RR = 0.498, 95% CI = 0.271, 0.917; <i>P</i> = .025) was observed with ciNPT-F use. Similarly, dehiscence rate reduction was associated with ciNPT-F use (RR = 0.349, 95% CI= 0.168, 0.725; <i>P</i> = .005). A trend towards reduction of SSI rates with ciNPT-F use compared with SOC was also noted (<i>P</i> = .053).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with SOC, ciNPT-MLA significantly reduced rates of dehiscence, while ciNPT-F use resulted in significantly reduced SSC and dehiscence rates with a trend toward reducing SSI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eplasty\",\"volume\":\"24 \",\"pages\":\"e40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367156/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eplasty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Meta-Analysis Comparing Outcomes of Two Different Closed Incision Negative Pressure Systems in Breast Surgery and Implications to Cost of Care.
Background: Surgical site complication (SSC) rates in breast surgery have been reported between 2.25% and 53%. Use of incision management may help reduce the risk of SSCs. The potential of 2 closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) systems to mitigate surgical site complications (SSC) and surgical site infections (SSI) in breast surgery were assessed.
Methods: A systematic literature review for breast surgery studies was conducted comparing ciNPT use against standard of care (SOC). SSC, SSI, and dehiscence rates were examined. SSCs were defined as all surgical site complications including SSI, dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, and necrosis. Risk ratios and random effects models were used to assess the effect of ciNPT with multilayer absorbent dressing (ciNPT-MLA) and ciNPT with foam dressing (ciNPT-F) compared with SOC.
Results: Eight articles were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in SSC rates (P = .307) or SSI rates (P = .453) between ciNPT-MLA and SOC were observed. ciNPT-MLA use was associated with a reduction in dehiscence compared with SOC (RR = 0.499, 95% CI = 0.303, 0.822; P = .006). A significant reduction in SSC rates (RR = 0.498, 95% CI = 0.271, 0.917; P = .025) was observed with ciNPT-F use. Similarly, dehiscence rate reduction was associated with ciNPT-F use (RR = 0.349, 95% CI= 0.168, 0.725; P = .005). A trend towards reduction of SSI rates with ciNPT-F use compared with SOC was also noted (P = .053).
Conclusions: Compared with SOC, ciNPT-MLA significantly reduced rates of dehiscence, while ciNPT-F use resulted in significantly reduced SSC and dehiscence rates with a trend toward reducing SSI.