Effect of negative suction drain on abdominal wounds after obstetric and gynecological surgery
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251570Keywords:
Negative suction drain, Gynecological surgery, Surgical site infection, Wound healingAbstract
Background: Wound complications are common after gynecological surgery. The purpose of the study was to find out whether use of negative suction reduces wound complications in gynecological surgery
Methods: Patients undergoing obstetric and gynecological surgeries were taken into the study. The study group had negative suction drain in the subcutaneous plane. The control group had conventional layered closure of abdominal wound. Wound complications were noted in each group and compared.
Results: We found significant reduction in surgical site infections in the negative suction group. In patients who are obese and BMI>25 there were less delayed wound healing, surgical site infections and gaping in negative suction group.
Conclusions: The use of negative suction drain significantly reduced surgical site infections. In patients with BMI>25 there was significant reduction in the incidence of delayed wound healing, gaping and surgical site infections.
Metrics
References
Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992;13:606–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/646436
Mahdi H, Gojayev A, Buechel M. Surgical site infection in women undergoing surgery for gynecologic cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014;24:779–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000126
Tuomi T, Pasanen A, Leminen A, Bützow R, Loukovaara M. Incidence of and risk factors for surgical site infections in women undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial carcinoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95:480–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12838
Uppal S, Penn C, Del Carmen MG, Rauh-Hain JA, Reynolds RK, Rice LW. Readmissions after major gynecologic oncology surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;141:287–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.02.031
Tran CW, McGree ME, Weaver AL. Surgical site infection after primary surgery forepithelial ovarian cancer: predictors and impacton survival. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136:278–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.12.007
O’Leary DP, Peirce C, Anglim B. Prophylactic negative pressure dressing use in closed laparotomy wounds following abdominal operations: a randomized, controlled, open label trial: the P.I.C.O. trial. Ann Surg. 2017;265:1082-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002098
Curran T, Alvarez D, Pastrana Del Valle J, Cataldo TE, Poylin V, Nagle D. Prophylactic closed-incision negative-pressure wound therapy is associated with decreased surgical site infection in high-risk colorectal surgery laparotomy wounds. Colorectal Dis. 2019;21:110–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14350
Zaidi A, El-Masry S. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in high-risk general surgery patients following laparotomy: a retrospective study. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19:283–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13458
Sahebally SM, McKevitt K, Stephens I. Negative pressure wound therapy for closed laparotomy incisions in general and colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg. 2018;153:183467 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3467
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Surgical site infection event. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn. Accessed on 21 January 2024.
Lewis LS, Convery PA, Bolac CS, Valea FA Lowery WJ, Havrilesky LJ. Cost of care using prophylactic negative pressure wound vacuum on closed laparotomy incisions. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132:684–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.01.014
Chopra K, Gowda AU, Morrow C, Holton L 3rd, Singh DP. The economic impact of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in high-risk abdominal incisions: A cost-utilityanalysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137:1284–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000002024