Efficacy Of Vacuum Sealing Drainage Research Articles

Investigating the efficacy of vacuum sealing drainage versus traditional negative pressure drainage in treating deep incision infections following posterior cervical internal fixation—a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundAssessing the efficacy and safety of Vacuum Sealing Drainage (VSD) in treating deep incision infections (DII) following posterior cervical internal fixation.MethodsWe retrospectively studied the clinical effects of VSD and Traditional Negative Pressure Drainage (TND) on 12 patients with deep incision infection after posterior cervical fixation surgery who were treated in our department from 2012 to 2020. A comparison of patient-related factors (age, gender, BMI, comorbidities, initial internal fixation surgery segment, preoperative laboratory inflammation indicators) and surgical-related factors (postoperative duration of fever, positive rate of drainage fluid bacterial culture, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score at 3 days after surgery, laboratory indicators at 3 days after surgery, debridement frequency and drainage time, hospital stay, internal fixation retention rate, and infection recurrence rate) between the VSD group and the TND group was conducted using independent sample t tests to draw experimental conclusions.ResultsThis study included 12 patients, with six cases of VSD (5 males and 1 female) and six cases of TND (4 males and 2 females). The VSD group had significantly lower postoperative fever time (1.50 ± 0.46 days vs. 4.28 ± 0.97 days, P < 0.05), a higher positive rate of bacterial cultures in drainage fluid (5/6 vs. 2/6, P < 0.05), lower 3 day VAS scores (3.13 ± 0.83 vs. 3.44 ± 0.88, P < 0.05), lower 3 day CRP levels (66.89 ± 23.65 mg/L vs. 57.11 ± 18.18 mg/L, P < 0.05), a shorter total drainage time (14.50 ± 2.98 days vs. 22.56 ± 3.01 days, P < 0.05), and a higher total drainage flow rate (395.63 ± 60.97 ml vs. 155.56 ± 32.54 ml, P < 0.05) than the TND group (the total drainage volume throughout the entire treatment process). In addition, the frequency of debridement (2.67 ± 0.52 times vs. 3.17 ± 0.41 times, P < 0.05) and average hospital stay (23.13 ± 3.27 days vs. 34.33 ± 6.86 days, P < 0.05) were significantly lower in the VSD group, although both groups retained internal fixation.ConclusionsVSD is a secure and effective treatment for deep incision infections that results from cervical posterior internal fixation surgery.

Clinical efficacy of vacuum sealing drainage in treatment of postoperative infection of filling injection

Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of the vacuum sealing drainage (VSD), which was used in postoperative infection of filling injection. Methods VSD technology was applied to treat 16 infected cases after local injection of filler or autologous fat. The wound recovery was observed for 3 to 8 months. Results Of the 16 patients, 3 used VSD twice, and the rest used once. All wound closured and cured. 2 to 3 days after negative pressure treatment, infection site swelling began to fade, and secretion also gradually become clear. The wound healed well with no recurrence of infection. No nerve and organ injury occured. Conclusions VSD technology applied in the infection of local injection of filling can be fully drainage, control infection and promote wound healing. Therefore, it is worth using in clinic setting. Key words: Vacuum sealing drainage; Injection filling; Injection

Efficacy of Vacuum Sealing Drainage after Incision of Perianal Abscess: Preliminary Experience

Efficacy of Vacuum Sealing Drainage after Incision of Perianal Abscess: Preliminary Experience

Clinical efficacy of vacuum-sealing drainage in treatment of Fournier’s gangrene

Clinical efficacy of vacuum-sealing drainage in treatment of Fournier’s gangrene