Negative pressure wound therapy for prevention of surgical site infection in patients at high risk after clean-contaminated major pancreatic resections: A single-center, phase 3, randomized clinical trial

Abstract

BackgroundSurgical site infections are an important burden of pancreatic surgery, prolonging hospitalization and delaying adjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to compare negative pressure wound therapy with standard sterile dressing in terms of the prevention of non–organ-space surgical site infection (superficial and deep surgical site infection) in the high-risk setting. MethodsThe trial was conducted at the University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy, from July 25, 2018, through October 10, 2019, among adults undergoing surgery for periampullary neoplasms. Only patients at high-risk for surgical site infection based on body mass index, diabetes, steroids, neoadjuvant therapy, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index, duration of surgery, and blood loss were included and randomized. ResultsA total of 351 patients were screened, 100 met the inclusion criteria and were 1:1 allocated in the 2 arms. The difference in terms of non–organ-space surgical site infection comparing negative pressure wound therapy with standard sterile dressing was not significant (10.9 vs 12.2%, risk ratio [RR] 1.144, confidence interval [CI] 95% 0.324–4.040, P = 1.000). Hematomas (4.3 vs 2%, RR 1.565, CI 95% 0.312–7.848, P = .609) and organ-space infections (46.7 vs 43.8%, RR 1.059, CI 95% 0.711–1.576, P = .836) were similar. Negative pressure wound therapy prevented the development of seromas (0 vs 12.2%, RR 0.483, CI 95% 0.390–0.599, P = .027). The aesthetic result assessed on postoperative day 7 was better in the negative pressure wound therapy group (visual analogue scale, 8 vs 7, P = .029; Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale, 3.2 vs 2.5, P = .009), but it was no more evident on postoperative day 30 after a total number of 23 dropouts. ConclusionCompared with standard sterile dressing, negative pressure wound therapy is not associated with an improved rate of non–organ-space surgical site infection after surgery for periampullary neoplasms in patients at high risk for surgical site infection. Additional studies will help identify the population that could benefit most from this intervention.