Outcomes of VAC versus conventional dressings in patients with lower limb ulcer

Authors

  • Hemant B. Janugade Department of General Surgery, KIMSDU, P. B. Road, Karad, Maharashtra, India
  • Raunaq S. Chabbra Department of General Surgery, KIMSDU, P. B. Road, Karad, Maharashtra, India
  • Ankur G. Das Department of General Surgery, KIMSDU, P. B. Road, Karad, Maharashtra, India
  • Aniket Surushe Department of General Surgery, KIMSDU, P. B. Road, Karad, Maharashtra, India
  • Harshvardhan Saygaonkar Department of General Surgery, KIMSDU, P. B. Road, Karad, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20181572

Keywords:

Chronic leg ulcers, Dressings, Graft uptake, Vacuum assisted closure

Abstract

Background: Chronic leg ulcers are a significant cause of morbidity in developing countries causing a significant burden on the health care system. The orthodox methods of dressing the wound requires long duration of hospital stay. The recent technique of vacuum assisted closure (VAC) has brought about new horizons in wound management with better outcomes.

Methods: A comparative randomized case control study was conducted with a total of 60 patients from November 2015 to December 2017 in patients admitted with lower limb ulcers to KIMSDU, Karad, Maharashtra.

Results: The mean graft uptake of Group A(VAC) and Group B (conventional dressings) was 82.23±15.60 and 70.07±18.42 respectively. Healing was achieved in minimum of 11 days and maximum of 48 days in Group A and minimum of 22 days and maximum of 59 days in Group B. The mean duration of wound healing in Group A and Group B was 27.70±9.57 and 41.93±11.58 days respectively. The duration of hospital stay was minimum of 13 days and maximum of 50 days in Group A and minimum of 24 days and maximum of 60 days in Group B.

Conclusions: Rate of granulation tissue formation, overall graft survival and patient compliance was better in vacuum assisted closure dressing group as compared to conventional dressing group. It was also seen that the overall hospital stay and post-operative complications were less in the vacuum assisted closure dressing group.

References

Frykberg RG, Banks J. Challenges in the treatment of chronic wounds. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(9):560-82.

Joseph E, Hamori CA, Bergman S. A prospective randomized trial of vacuum-assisted closure versus standard therapy of chronic nonhealing wounds. Wounds. 2000;12(3):60-7.

White R, McIntosh C. Topical therapies for diabetic foot ulcers: standard treatments. J Wound Care. 2008;17:426-32.

Aslam R, Rehman B, Nasir II, Ahmed R, Iftikhar M, Sayyar M. Comparison of vacuum assisted closure versus conventional dressings in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. KJMS. 2015;8(2).

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. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:631-6.

Singh B, Sharma D, Jaswal KS. Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy versus conventional dressings in the management of chronic diabetic foot ulcers in a tertiary care hospital in North India. Int J Sci Res. 2017;6(8).

Priyatham K, Prabhakara Rao YP, Satyanavamani DG, Poornima D. Comparison of vacuum assisted closure vs conventional moist dressing in the management of chronic wounds. IOSR-JDMS. 2016;15(2)(VII):35-49.

Riaz MU, Rauf MU, Akbar KA. Comparison of vacuum assisted closure v/s normal saline dressing in healing diabetic wounds. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2010;4(4):308-12.

Etoz A, Kahveci R. Negative pressure wound therapy on diabetic foot ulcers. Wounds. 2007;19:250-4.

Dzieciuchowicz L, Espinosa G, Grochowicz L. Vacuum assisted closure (VAC) in the treatment of advanced diabetic foot. CIR ESP. 2009;86:213-8.

Sepúlveda G, Espíndola M, Maureira M, Sepúlveda E, Fernández JI, Oliva C, et al. Negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard wound dressing in the treatment of diabetic foot amputation: a randomized controlled trial. CIR ESP. 2009;86:171-7.

Moues CM, van den Bemd GJ, Meerding WJ, Hovius SE. An economic evaluation of the use of TNP on full thickness wounds. J Wound Care. 2005;14:224-7.

Ubbink DT, Westerbos SJ, Nelson EA, Vermeulen H. A systematic review of topical negative pressure therapy for acute and chronic wounds. Br J Surg. 2008;95:685-92.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-21

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles