Research question:

The objective of this investigation is to

• assess the benefit of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard wound therapy

The benefit assessment of NPWT in patients with wounds healing by secondary intention was conducted as part of project N17-01A.

Conclusions:

A total of 45 studies supplied usable results on patient-relevant outcomes. Most studies were on postoperative wounds in endoprosthetics, obstetrics (Caesarean section), abdominal and cardiovascular surgery. The majority of studies were done on wounds with an elevated risk of impaired wound healing. No results whatsoever were available on a relevant number of further studies (23% data gap); hence, the certainty of conclusions was downgraded to account for potential publication bias.

With regard to the outcome for wound closure, there was a hint of greater benefit of NPWT in comparison with standard wound therapy in wounds healing by primary intention. The analyses additionally revealed an indication of greater benefit of NPWT in terms of avoiding wound infection in wounds healing by primary intention. For the remaining outcomes (particularly mortality, total rate of complications, pain, length of hospital stay, and health-related quality of life), there were no hints of benefit or harm of NPWT.

Publisher

Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care

Topic

Negative pressure wound therapy for wounds healing by primary intention

Commissioning agency

Federal Joint Committee

Commission awarded on

27 April 2017

Internal Commission No.

N17-01B

Address of publisher

This report was prepared in collaboration with external experts.

The responsibility for the contents of the report lies solely with IQWiG.

According to §139b (3) No. 2 of Social Code Book (SGB) V, Statutory Health Insurance, external experts who are involved in the Institute’s research commissions must disclose “all connections to interest groups and contract organizations, particularly in the pharmaceutical and medical devices industries, including details on the type and amount of any remuneration received”. The Institute received the completed Form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest from each external expert. The information provided was reviewed by a Committee of the Institute specifically established to assess conflicts of interests. The information on conflicts of interest provided by the external experts and external reviewers is presented in Chapter A9 of the full report. No conflicts of interest were detected that could endanger professional independence with regard to the work on the present commission.

External experts

• Heiner Bucher, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland (from 12/2017)
• Sven Gregor, Düsseldorf, Germany
• Heike Raatz, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland (until 12/2017)

IQWiG thanks the external experts for their collaboration in the project.

IQWiG employees

• Michael Barth
• Katrin Dreck
• Moritz Felsch
• Wolfram Groß
• Thomas Jaschinski
• Heike Kölsch
• Mandy Kromp
• Inga Overesch
• Stefan Sauerland
• Siw Waffenschmidt
• Yvonne Zens