Macroscopic changes during negative pressure wound therapy of the open abdomen using conventional negative pressure wound therapy and NPWT with a protective disc over the intestines

BMC Surgery

Richard Ingemansson³  Joanna Hlebowicz¹  Johan Hansson⁴  Malin Malmsjö²  Sandra Lindstedt³ 

[1] Department of Medicine, Lund University and Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden;Department of Ophthalmology, Lund University and Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden;Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Lund University and Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden;Institution of Surgical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

关键词: intestinal wall;    macroscopic changes;    open abdomen;    negative pressure wound therapy;   

Others  :  1123459
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2482-11-10

 received in 2011-01-05, accepted in 2011-04-29,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Higher closure rates of the open abdomen have been reported with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) than with other wound management techniques. However, the method has occasionally been associated with increased development of fistulae. We have previously shown that NPWT induces ischemia in the underlying small intestines close to the vacuum source, and that a protective disc placed between the intestines and the vacuum source prevents the induction of ischemia. In the present study we compare macroscopic changes after 12, 24, and 48 hours, using conventional NPWT and NPWT with a protective disc between the intestines and the vacuum source.

Methods

Twelve pigs underwent midline incision. Six animals underwent conventional NPWT, while the other six pigs underwent NPWT with a protective disc inserted between the intestines and the vacuum source. Macroscopic changes were photographed and quantified after 12, 24, and 48 hours of NPWT.

Results

The surface of the small intestines was red and mottled as a result of petechial bleeding in the intestinal wall in all cases. After 12, 24 and 48 hours of NPWT, the area of petechial bleeding was significantly larger when using conventional NPWT than when using NPWT with the protective disc (9.7 ± 1.0 cm² vs. 1.8 ± 0.2 cm², p < 0.001, 12 hours), (14.5 ± 0.9 cm² vs. 2.0 ± 0.2 cm², 24 hours) (17.0 ± 0.7 cm² vs. 2.5 ± 0.2 cm² with the disc, p < 0.001, 48 hours)

Conclusions

The areas of petechial bleeding in the small intestinal wall were significantly larger following conventional NPWT after 12, 24 and 48 hours, than using NPWT with a protective disc between the intestines and the vacuum source. The protective disc protects the intestines, reducing the amount of petechial bleeding.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Lindstedt et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Schecter WP, Ivatury RR, Rotondo MF, Hirshberg A: Open abdomen after trauma and abdominal sepsis: a strategy for management. J Am Coll Surg 2006, 203(3):390-396.
• [2]Swan MC, Banwell PE: The open abdomen: aetiology, classification and current management strategies. J Wound Care 2005, 14(1):7-11.
• [3]Deenichin GP: Abdominal compartment syndrome. Surg Today 2008, 38(1):5-19.
• [4]Stevens P: Vacuum-assisted closure of laparostomy wounds: a critical review of the literature. Int Wound J 2009, 6(4):259-266.
• [5]Becker HP, Willms A, Schwab R: Small bowel fistulas and the open abdomen. Scand J Surg 2007, 96(4):263-271.
• [6]Bee TK, Croce MA, Magnotti LJ, Zarzaur BL, Maish GO, Minard G, Schroeppel TJ, Fabian TC: Temporary abdominal closure techniques: a prospective randomized trial comparing polyglactin 910 mesh and vacuum-assisted closure. J Trauma 2008, 65(2):337-342. discussion 342-334
• [7]Fischer JE: A cautionary note: the use of vacuum-assisted closure systems in the treatment of gastrointestinal cutaneous fistula may be associated with higher mortality from subsequent fistula development. Am J Surg 2008, 196(1):1-2.
• [8]Rao M, Burke D, Finan PJ, Sagar PM: The use of vacuum-assisted closure of abdominal wounds: a word of caution. Colorectal Dis 2007, 9(3):266-268.
• [9]Trevelyan SL, Carlson GL: Is TNP in the open abdomen safe and effective? J Wound Care 2009, 18(1):24-25.
• [10]Lindstedt S, Malmsjo M, Hansson J, Hlebowicz J, Ingemansson R: Microvascular blood flow changes in the small intestinal wall during conventional negative pressure wound therapy and negative pressure wound therapy using a protective disc over the intestines in laparostomy. Ann Surg 2011, in press.
• [11]Kaplan M: Managing the open abdomen. Ostomy Wound Manage 2004, 50(1A Suppl):C2. 1-8, quiz 1p following 8
• [12]Malbrain ML, De laet I, Cheatham M: Consensus conference definitions and recommendations on intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and the abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS)--the long road to the final publications, how did we get there? Acta Clin Belg Suppl 2007, (1):44-59.
• [13]DeFranzo AJ, Argenta L: Vacuum-assisted closure for the treatment of abdominal wounds. Clin Plast Surg 2006, 33(2):213-224. vi
• [14]Miller PR, Meredith JW, Johnson JC, Chang MC: Prospective evaluation of vacuum-assisted fascial closure after open abdomen: planned ventral hernia rate is substantially reduced. Ann Surg 2004, 239(5):608-614. discussion 614-606
• [15]Malmsjo M, Petzina R, Ugander M, Engblom H, Torbrand C, Mokhtari A, Hetzer R, Arheden H, Ingemansson R: Preventing heart injury during negative pressure wound therapy in cardiac surgery: assessment using real-time magnetic resonance imaging. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009, 138(3):712-717.
• [16]Petersson U, Acosta S, Bjorck M: Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction--a novel technique for late closure of the open abdomen. World J Surg 2007, 31(11):2133-2137.