ArticleCureus2024
The ACS-NSQIP Analysis of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Following Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Diagnoses.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Surgical site infections (SSIs) continue to be a challenging issue among patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Anecdotally, the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) following pancreatectomy for cancer has been associated with decreased SSIs. The objective of this study was to compare the postoperative outcomes of NPWT and non-NPWT for incisional wound care following distal pancreatectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic diagnoses using a national surgical database. Methods The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) was queried from 2005 to 2019 for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic diagnoses using primary Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The primary outcome was surgical site infection rates between NPWT and non-NPWT patient groups. Secondary outcomes include sepsis, septic shock, readmission, and reoperation. Outcomes of interest were compared using multivariate logistic regression. Results A total of 54,457 patients underwent pancreatectomy with 131 receiving NPWT. Multivariate analysis, while accounting for patient characteristics, including wound classification, showed no difference in postoperative superficial SSI, deep SSI, sepsis, septic shock, or readmission between the NPWT and non-NPWT groups. Organ space SSI was higher in the NPWT group (21% vs 12%, p=0.001). Reoperation related to procedure was also high in the NPWT group (14% vs 4.3%, p<0.001). Conclusion The use of NPWT in distal pancreatectomies and pancreatoduodenectomies is associated with increased organ space SSIs and reoperation rates, with no difference in superficial SSI, deep SSI, or readmission. This large sample study shows no significant benefit of using NPWT incisional wound care after pancreatectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.