PICO™ (Closed-Incision Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy) Dressing Use as Postoperative Prophylaxis for Preventing Surgical Site Infections in Spinal Surgery: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study

Hassan Imtiaz,Chadi Ali,Hilali Noordeen,Hanny Anwar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.69214
2024-09-11
Cureus
Abstract:Introduction Surgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the dreaded complications of spinal surgery. These typically develop within the first 30 days following surgery. The overall pooled incidence of SSIs is reported at 3.1%. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been employed for the management of open wounds and soft tissue injury. There has been a recent trend towards the use of closed incision NPWT (ciNPT), such as PICO. There are only a few studies evaluating the prophylactic use of ciNPT in spinal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic use of PICO dressings can reduce SSI incidence and complications in spinal surgery. Methods Data were collected retrospectively for patients undergoing spinal surgery, with a PICO dressing used for closed surgical incisions, from February 2021 to October 2022. Each patient was followed up for 30 days. The results were compared with local hospital infection control statistics for previous years. Results A total of 50 patients underwent spinal surgery and had PICO dressings post-operatively. None of the patients developed a seroma. Two out of 50 (4.0%) patients developed wound dehiscence and then subsequent SSI (1 superficial, 1 deep). These were managed conservatively with the use of antibiotics and prolonged ciNPT. None of these patients returned to the theatre. The average SSI incidence from previous years was 9.27 ± 4.14 per annum (1.15%), but with an average of 77.3% of these requiring a return to theatres. Conclusion Our study reflects that there is no difference in the incidence rates for SSIs for patients who have PICO dressings versus those having standard occlusive dressings as post-operative closed surgical incision site wound closure following spinal surgery. For those who do develop SSIs, there was no difference in the rates of return to theatres among the two patient populations.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?