|
KMID : 0371420140870050260
|
|
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
2014 Volume.87 No. 5 p.260 ~ p.264
|
|
|
Vacuum-assisted close versus conventional treatment for postlaparotomy wound dehiscence
|
|
Ko Yoon-Song
Jung Sung-Won
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: The conventional treatment for postlaparotomy wound dehiscence usually involves surgical revision. Recently, vacuum-assisted closure has been successfully used in postlaparotomy wound dehiscence. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcome of 207 patients undergoing vacuum-assisted closure therapy or conventional treatment for postlaparotomy wound dehiscence.
Methods: Two hundred and seven consecutive patients underwent treatment for postlaparotomy wound dehiscence: vacuum-assisted closure therapy (January 2007 through August 2012, n = 25) or conventional treatment (January 2001 through August 2012, n = 182).
Results: The failure rate to first-line treatment with vacuum-assisted closure and conventional treatment were 0% and 14.3%, respectively (P = 0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in the enterocutaneous fistulas and hospital stay after vacuum-assisted closure therapy or conventional treatment respectively.
Conclusion: Our findings support that vacuum-assisted closure therapy is a safe and reliable option in postlaparotomy wound dehiscence with very low failure rate in surgical revision compared with conventional treatment.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Vacuum-assisted closure, Dehiscence, Wound
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
   
|