Does the Use of Epicutaneous Vacuum-assisted Closure After Revision Surgery on the Spine Reduce Further Wound Revision Surgery?

Overview

Journal Int Orthop

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2023 Jan 17

PMID 36648534

Authors

Stefan Glasel

Jan-Sven Jarvers

Philipp Pieroh

Christoph-Eckhard Heyde

Ulrich J Spiegl

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the effect of epicutaneous vacuum therapy on the rate of unplanned spinal wound revisions compared with conventional wound dressing.

Methods: This retrospective study included patients who underwent unplanned revision spine surgery after primary aseptic spine surgery who were treated at a level I spine centre between December 2011 and December 2019. Patients with revision surgery who required a further unplanned revision surgery during the inpatient stay were considered a treatment failure. The epicutaneous vacuum-assisted closure (Epi-VAC) therapy was the standard treatment method beginning in 2017 (the epi-VAC group). Before, conventional wound dressing was used (the control group (CG)). In addition, a one-to-one matched-pair comparison analysis was performed between both groups.

Results: Of 218 patients, 48 were in the epi-VAC group. The mean age was 65.1 years (epi-VAC 68.2 to CG 64.3 years (P = 0.085)), and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.2 kg/m (epi-VAC 29.4 to CG 27.9 kg/m (P = 0.16)). No significant differences in the treatment failure rate could be detected between the two groups (epi-VAC 25% to CG 22.4% (P = 0.7)). There was also no significant difference for the matched-pair analysis (epi-VAC 26.1% to CG 15.2% (P = 0.3)). An elevated CRP level (C-reactive protein) immediately before the first wound revision was a significant risk factor for further revision surgery (treatment failure: 135.2 ± 128.6; no treatment failure: 79.7 ± 86.1 mg/l (P < 0.05)).

Conclusion: Concerning repeat unplanned wound revision after spinal revision surgery, we cannot demonstrate an advantage of the epicutaneous vacuum therapy over conventional wound dressing.

Citing Articles

Vacuum assisted closure and local drug delivery systems in spinal infections: A review of current evidence.

Kumar N, Hui S, Ali S, Lee R, Jeyachandran P, Tan J N Am Spine Soc J. 2023; 16:100266.

PMID: 37727637 PMC: 10505691. DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100266.

References

Spiegl U, Kilper A, Glasmacher S, Heyde C, Josten C . [Which factors influence the inpatient course for patients with spondylodiscitis?]. Unfallchirurg. 2020; 123(9):724-730. DOI: 10.1007/s00113-020-00781-y. View

. . Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2018; 61(4):448-473. DOI: 10.1007/s00103-018-2706-2. View

Dyck B, Bailey C, Steyn C, Petrakis J, Urquhart J, Raj R . Use of incisional vacuum-assisted closure in the prevention of postoperative infection in high-risk patients who underwent spine surgery: a proof-of-concept study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019; 31(3):430-439. DOI: 10.3171/2019.2.SPINE18947. View

Ogihara S, Yamazaki T, Shiibashi M, Chikuda H, Maruyama T, Miyoshi K . Risk factors for deep surgical site infection following posterior instrumented fusion for degenerative diseases in the thoracic and/or lumbar spine: a multicenter, observational cohort study of 2913 consecutive cases. Eur Spine J. 2021; 30(6):1756-1764. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06609-y. View

Zhou J, Wang R, Huo X, Xiong W, Kang L, Xue Y . Incidence of Surgical Site Infection After Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 45(3):208-216. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003218. View

Morykwas M, Simpson J, Punger K, Argenta A, Kremers L, Argenta J . Vacuum-assisted closure: state of basic research and physiologic foundation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006; 117(7 Suppl):121S-126S. DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000225450.12593.12. View

Adogwa O, Fatemi P, Perez E, Moreno J, Gazcon G, Ziya L Gokaslan . Negative pressure wound therapy reduces incidence of postoperative wound infection and dehiscence after long-segment thoracolumbar spinal fusion: a single institutional experience. Spine J. 2014; 14(12):2911-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.011. View

Piper K, Tomlinson S, Santangelo G, Van Galen J, DeAndrea-Lazarus I, Towner J . Risk factors for wound complications following spine surgery. Surg Neurol Int. 2017; 8:269. PMC: 5682694. DOI: 10.4103/sni.sni_306_17. View

Hachenberg T, Senturk M, Jannasch O, Lippert H . [Postoperative wound infections. Pathophysiology, risk factors and preventive concepts]. Anaesthesist. 2010; 59(9):851-66. DOI: 10.1007/s00101-010-1789-4. View

10.

Dobran M, Marini A, Nasi D, Gladi M, Liverotti V, Costanza M . Risk factors of surgical site infections in instrumented spine surgery. Surg Neurol Int. 2017; 8:212. PMC: 5613592. DOI: 10.4103/sni.sni_222_17. View

11.

Naylor R, Gilder H, Gupta N, Hydrick T, Labott J, Mauler D . Effects of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy on Wound Dehiscence and Surgical Site Infection Following Instrumented Spinal Fusion Surgery-A Single Surgeon's Experience. World Neurosurg. 2020; 137:e257-e262. PMC: 8063507. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.152. View

12.

Malmsjo M, Ingemansson R, Martin R, Huddleston E . Negative-pressure wound therapy using gauze or open-cell polyurethane foam: similar early effects on pressure transduction and tissue contraction in an experimental porcine wound model. Wound Repair Regen. 2009; 17(2):200-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2009.00461.x. View

13.

Birke-Sorensen H, Malmsjo M, Rome P, Hudson D, Krug E, Berg L . Evidence-based recommendations for negative pressure wound therapy: treatment variables (pressure levels, wound filler and contact layer)--steps towards an international consensus. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011; 64 Suppl:S1-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2011.06.001. View

14.

Deng H, Chan A, Ammanuel S, Chan A, Oh T, Skrehot H . Risk factors for deep surgical site infection following thoracolumbar spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020; 32(2):292-301. View

15.

Bowler P . Wound pathophysiology, infection and therapeutic options. Ann Med. 2003; 34(6):419-27. DOI: 10.1080/078538902321012360. View

16.

du Prel J, Rohrig B, Hommel G, Blettner M . Choosing statistical tests: part 12 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010; 107(19):343-8. PMC: 2881615. DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2010.0343. View

17.

Hoeller S, Roch P, Weiser L, Hubert J, Lehmann W, Saul D . C-reactive protein in spinal surgery: more predictive than prehistoric. Eur Spine J. 2021; 30(5):1261-1269. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-021-06782-8. View

18.

Morykwas M, Faler B, Pearce D, Argenta L . Effects of varying levels of subatmospheric pressure on the rate of granulation tissue formation in experimental wounds in swine. Ann Plast Surg. 2001; 47(5):547-51. DOI: 10.1097/00000637-200111000-00013. View