Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

New therapeutic approaches in wound care. A prospective randomized trial of vacuum-assisted closure versus standard therapy of chronic nonhealing wounds
Joseph E, Hamori CA, Bergman S, Roaf E, Swann NF, Anastasi GW
Wounds 2000 Mar;12(3):60-67
clinical trial
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: No. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

Chronic, open, nonhealing wounds pose a continual challenge in medicine. Our objective was to evaluate vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy's ability to improve the healing rate of chronic wounds compared to the traditional saline-wet-to-moist (WM) dressings. Twenty-four patients with 36 chronic, nonhealing wounds were enrolled in the study after obtaining proper consent. Subjects were randomized to the VAC group or the control group. Biopsies and wound measurements were obtained by blinded independent wound evaluators. The most significant difference was the change in depth of 66 percent for VAC compared to 20% for WM (p < 0.000001). Histologically, the groups exhibited different characteristics. In the WM group, 81% (n = 13) displayed inflammation and fibrosis. The chief characteristic of the VAC group was granulation tissue formation in 64 percent (n = 9) of those wounds. The VAC system should be used to obtain wound closure, especially of chronic nonhealing wounds with great depth, rather than the traditional saline WM dressings.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help