03.05.2015 Views

Here - EWMA 2013

Here - EWMA 2013

Here - EWMA 2013

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

ORAL PRESENTATIONS<br />

168<br />

Free Paper Session: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy<br />

NPWT* AND ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT: A COMPLEX THERAPEUTIC STRATEGY<br />

TO TREAT DIFFICULT TO HEAL WOUNDS IN SEVERE PROSTHETIC JOINT<br />

INFECTIONS<br />

Ciro Pempinello 1 , Aldo Bova 1 , Fiorella Martucci 2 , Raffaele Pempinello 2<br />

1 Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology – S.Gennaro Hospital (Napoli, Italy);<br />

2 Department of Infectious Diseases – Cotugno Hospital (Napoli, Italy).<br />

Aim: Treatment of soft tissue defects resulting from bone infections,when foreign<br />

implants are involved, represents a major challenge.VAC therapy has recently been<br />

used in orthopedic field for management of open wounds. The purpose of this study was<br />

to evaluate the use of VAC Therapy to improve the outcome of high risk wounds in<br />

critical patients affected by periprosthetic infections.<br />

Methods: We observed 22 patients out of 36 affected by severe periprosthetic infections<br />

with comorbidities, presenting difficult to heal wounds. These infections were treated<br />

with 2 stage procedure, and VAC was applied. Targeted antibiotic long therapy was<br />

administered. The study evaluated treatment for up to 16 weeks or till complete closure<br />

was achieved compared with control group of 14 patients treated with conventional<br />

dressing. Size of wound healing and time of closure were compared. No relapse was<br />

observed in 22 patients(mean follow-up 24 months).<br />

Results: 22 patients received VAC for 3 weeks. The sponge was inserted into the<br />

wound cavity/periprosthetically at the pressure of 150mm Hg till sponge removal. A<br />

better and more rapid control of the infection and reduced time to complete closure of<br />

the wound was achieved in 19/22 patients treated with VAC compared with 5/14 patients<br />

in control group.<br />

Conclusion: VAC therapy would increase faster wound healing than treatment with<br />

conventional dressing therapy. Based on our data, VAC shows an high infection<br />

eradication rate with positive effect on wound healing and should be considered for high<br />

risk wounds in patients affected by periprosthetic infections with comorbidities.<br />

*VAC therapy<br />

FREE PAPER SESSION: NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY<br />

169<br />

Free Paper Session: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy<br />

THE ROLE OF VACUUM IN THE TREATMENT OF METHICILLIN-RESISTANT DEEP<br />

STERNAL WOUND INFECTION<br />

Marisa De Feo 1 , Veronica D›Oria 1 , Ester Della Ratta 1 , Marco Montibello 1 ,<br />

Alessandro Della Corte 1 , Pasquale Santè 1 , Gianantonio Nappi 1<br />

1 Dpt Cardiothoracic Science Second University of Naples (Naples, Italy).<br />

Aim: To review our experience with two alternative treatments of deep sternal wound<br />

infections (DSWI), focusing on methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections.<br />

Methods: Between 2009 and 2012, 35 patients with post-cardiotomy DSWI were<br />

primarily treated by NPWT*. In 24 of them the etiology was staphylococcal (Group A).<br />

Comparisons were performed with 30 previous staphylococcal DSWI patients who<br />

received closed mediastinal irrigation with antibiotic solution (Group B). The prevalence<br />

of methicillin-resistance was:groups A=68.5%, B=56.7%. Hospital-stay and time between<br />

DSWI treatment initiation and wound healing were compared between the two groups.<br />

Results: One Group B patient died during DSWI treatment. The median healing time<br />

was 14 days in Group A (mean 15.5±3.2), 18 (mean 21.2±16.4) in Group B (p=0.03).<br />

DSWI did not recur following NPWT* treatment, while 7 patients had recurrence in Group<br />

B (24%). Hospital-stay was significantly shorter in Group A (median 27.5 days, mean<br />

29.2±11.3 versus 45, 49.2±19.3; p

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!