Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2013 · 39 citations · 11 references
MedicineOrthopaedic SurgerySurgeryDiabetic Foot CareGeneral SurgeryWound HealingDiabetic Foot Ulcer CareNegative Pressure Wound TherapyWound CareWound ClosureWound DebridementWound ManagementClosed Incision Negative Pressure TherapyContinuous Negative Pressure TherapyHealing Outcome MeasurementIncisional Negative Pressure Wound TherapyNegative Pressure Wound Therapy AdjunctsNegative Pressure Wound Therapy DressingsRandomized Clinical TrialsWound Care In Diabetes
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare two approaches to negative-pressure wound therapy: 125-mmHg pressure with a polyurethane foam dressing and 75-mmHg pressure with a silicone-coated dressing. METHODS: Forty patients with diabetic foot wounds, after incision and drainage or amputation for infection, were assigned randomly to negative-pressure wound therapy with 75-mmHg continuous pressure with a silicone-covered dressing (75-mmHg group) or 125-mmHg with a polyurethane foam dressing (125-mmHg group) for up to 4 weeks or until surgical closure. RESULTS: There was no difference in the proportion of wounds that were closed surgically (75-mmHg group, 50 percent; 125-mmHg group, 60 percent), wounds that demonstrated 50 percent wound area reduction (75-mmHg group, 65 percent; 125-mmHg group, 80 percent), or wounds that demonstrated 50 percent wound volume reduction after 4 weeks of therapy (75-mmHg group, 95 percent; 125-mmHg group, 90 percent). CONCLUSION: The authors' results suggest that there was no difference in outcomes in wounds treated with low pressure (75 mmHg) with a silicone-coated interface and high pressure (125 mmHg) with a polyurethane foam interface. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.
11
Peter Blume, Jodi Walters, Wyatt G. Payne et al. · Diabetes Care · 2008 · 634 citations · Full text
Peter Sheehan, Peter Jones, Antonella Caselli et al. · Diabetes Care · 2003 · 577 citations · Full text