Efficacy of negative pressure wound therapy using suction drain in the management of chronic wounds


  • Mohammed Kashif Imran Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Mohan Kumar K. Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Sreeramulu P. N. Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Bhaskaran . Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Krishna Prasad K. Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Shashirekha C. A. Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India
  • Prakash Dave Department of Surgery, SDUMC, Tamaka, Kolar, Karnataka, India




Chronic wounds, Graft, Rate of granulation tissue formation, Topical negative pressure moist wound dressing


Background: Chronic non-healing wounds are one of the major burden to the patients in the present era and covers about 1% of adult population and 3.6% of the population greater than 65 years. Chronic leg wounds are the common cause of morbidity and its prevalence in the community range from 1.9 to 13.1%. Indian studies show the prevalence of chronic wounds of around 4.5/1000 population. Recent studies have shown that application of a sub atmospheric pressure in a controlled manner to the wound site helps significantly in wound healing. Aim of the present study is to assess the efficacy of topical negative pressure moist wound dressings in wound healing process in chronic wounds and to prove that negative pressure dressings can be used as a much better treatment option than conventional saline dressings in the management of chronic wounds.

Methods: After 10 days, in study group the mean rate of granulation tissue formation, mean graft, mean hospital stay was 81.7%,80.6%, 34.7 days respectively and the same in control group it is 41.9%. ,60.45%, 58.60 days respectively.

Results: To conclude, topical negative pressure dressing’s help in faster healing of chronic wounds and better graft take up and reduces hospital stay of these patients.

Conclusions: The database of our retrospective study regarding age and sex incidence, clinicopathological features and therapeutic outcome was comparable to other studies in various literatures.


Agale SV. Chronic leg ulcers: epidemiology, aetiopathogenesis, and management. Ulcers. 2013.

Muldner GD, Haberer PA, Jeter KF. Clinician’s Pocket Guide to Chronic Wound Repair. 4th ed. Springhouse: Springhouse Corporation; 1999:85.

Cohen IK. A Brief History of Wound Healing.1st ed. Yardley, PA: Oxford Clinical Communications Inc; 1998.

Blevins, Steve M., and Bronze, Michael S. Robert Koch and the ‘golden age’ of bacteriology. Int J Infect Diseas. 2010;14:e744-51.

Helling TS, Daon E. The Great War, Antoine Depage, and the resurgence of debridement. Ann Surg.1998;228:173-81.

Cohen IK, Diegelmann RF, Crossland MC. Principles of Surgery. 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Inc.;1994;279.

Wu SC, Marston W, Armstrong DG. Wound care: the role of advanced wound healing technologies. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:59S-66S.

Nain PS, Uppal SK, Garg R, Bajaj K, Garg S. Role of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Healing of Diabetic Foot Ulcers.. J Surg Tech Case Rep.2011;3:17-22.

Armstrong DG, Lavery LA. Negative pressure wound therapy after partial diabetic foot amputation: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1704-10.

Morykwas MJ, Argenta LC, Shelton-Brown EI, McGuirt W. Vacuum-assisted closure: A new method for wound control and treatment: Animal studies and basic foundation. Ann Plast Surg. 1997;38:553-62.

W. Fleischmann, E. Lang, M. Russ.Treatment of infection by vacuum sealing Unfallchirurg, 1997;100:301-34.

Boone D, Braitman E, Gentics C, Afthinos J, Latif J, Sordillo E, Todd G, Lantis II JC. Bacterial burden and wound outcomes as influenced by negative pressure wound therapy. Wounds. 2010;22:32.

Blume PA, Walters J, Payne W, Ayala J, Lantis J. Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy using vacuum-assisted closure with advanced moist wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Diab Care. 2008;31:631-6.

McCallon SK, Knight CA, Valiulus JP, Cunningham MW, McCulloch JM, Farinas LP. Vacuum-assisted closure versus saline-moistened gauze in the healing of postoperative diabetic foot wounds. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2000;46:28-32.

Eginton MT, Brown KR, Seabrook GR, Towne JB, Cambria RA. A prospective randomized evaluation of negative-pressure wound dressings for diabetic foot wounds. Ann Vasc Surg. 2003;17:645-9.

Moues CM, Vos MC, van den Bemd GJ, Stijnen T, Hovius SE. Bacterial load in relation to vacuum-assisted closure wound therapy: A perspective randomized trial. Wound Repair Regen. 2004;12:11-7.

Vuerstaek T, Vainas J, Wuite P, Nelemans MHA, Neumann, Veraart JJM. State-of-the-art treatment of chronic leg ulcers: a randomized controlled trial comparing vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C.) with modern wound dressings. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44:1029-37.

Ferrell BA, Osterweil D, Christenson P. A randomized trial of low-air-loss beds for treatment of pressure ulcers. J Am Medi Assoc. 1993;269:494-7.

Lavery LA, Boulton AJ, Niezgoda JA, Sheehan P, A comparison of diabetic foot ulcer outcomes using negative pressure wound therapy versus historical standard of care. Int Wound J. 2007;4:103-39.

Mody GN, Nirmal IA, Duraisamy S, Perakath B. A blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial of topical negative pressure wound closure in India. Ostomy Wound Management. 2008;54:36-46.






Original Research Articles