Abdominal wound dehiscence after appendectomy during pregnancy treated by negative pressure wound therapy with subsequent vaginal delivery: A case report and literature review
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, kazuistiky, přehledy
Grantová podpora
Centre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health, University of Bergen
PubMed
39825682
PubMed Central
PMC12177310
DOI
10.1002/ijgo.16155
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- appendicitis, negative pressure wound therapy, obstetrics, pregnancy, surgical site infection, vacuum‐assisted closure system, wound dehiscence,
- MeSH
- apendektomie * škodlivé účinky MeSH
- apendicitida chirurgie MeSH
- dehiscence operační rány * terapie etiologie MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- komplikace těhotenství * chirurgie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- těhotenství MeSH
- terapie ran pomocí řízeného podtlaku * metody MeSH
- vedení porodu metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- těhotenství MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- kazuistiky MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is a very effective method in the treatment of dehiscent, infected, and non-healing wounds. Difficult wound healing occurs especially in late pregnancy due to the rapid enlargement of the uterus and the constantly increasing tension of the entire abdominal wall. In cases of dehiscence of the surgical wound during pregnancy, proper subsequent treatment is needed, where it is necessary to consider the safety of the mother as well as the fetus. We report the case of a 30-week pregnant patient who was surgically treated for acute appendicitis in pregnancy with an open appendectomy approach. Postoperative complications resulted in wound dehiscence with complete defect in fascia, which was treated with negative V.A.C. ATS® Therapy System. The therapy was started in the 30th week of pregnancy and continued until delivery with regular check-ups and regular redressing of the vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) system. At 38 weeks of pregnancy, the patient delivered vaginally with continued VAC therapy in situ. The final suture took place 3 days after vaginal delivery. Non-healing wounds with abdominal wall defects should be treated using a multidisciplinary approach, and NPWT can be used. This therapy can also be used during pregnancy. Vaginal delivery is preferred because it reduces the risk of further formation or deepening of the abdominal wall defect after a sufficient time interval from the start of the treatment. This complex case with a literature review of surgical complications in pregnancy treated with NPWT therapy highlights the advantage of a multidisciplinary approach.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Choi YS, Seo JH, Yi JW, Choe Y‐M, Heo YS, Choi SK. Clinical characteristics of acute appendicitis in pregnancy: 10‐year experience at a single institution in South Korea. J Clin Med. 2023;12:3277. doi: 10.3390/jcm12093277 PubMed DOI PMC
Acute appendicitis in pregnancy – UpToDate n.d. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/acute‐appendicitis‐in‐pregnancy?search=appendicitis%20in%20pregnancy&source=search_result&selectedTitle=1%7E150&usage_type=default&display_rank=1. [Accessed 15 December 2024].
Mourad J, Elliott JP, Erickson L, Lisboa L. Appendicitis in pregnancy: new information that contradicts long‐held clinical beliefs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1027‐1029. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.105396 PubMed DOI
Vujic J, Marsoner K, Lipp‐Pump AH, Klaritsch P, Mischinger HJ, Kornprat P. Non‐obstetric surgery during pregnancy – an eleven‐year retrospective analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19:382. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2554-6 PubMed DOI PMC
Haataja A, Kokki H, Uimari O, Kokki M. Non‐obstetric surgery during pregnancy and the effects on maternal and fetal outcomes: a systematic review. Scand J Surg. 2023;112:187‐205. doi: 10.1177/14574969231175569 PubMed DOI
Carbonnel M, Brot D, Benedetti C, et al. Risks factors FOR wound complications after cesarean section. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2021;50:101987. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101987 PubMed DOI
Gillespie BM, Ellwood D, Thalib L, et al. Incidence and risk factors for surgical wound complications in women with body mass index >30 kg/m2 following cesarean delivery: a secondary analysis. AJOG Glob Rep. 2022;2:100069. doi: 10.1016/j.xagr.2022.100069 PubMed DOI PMC
Surgical site infections . Prevention and Treatment. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2020. PubMed
Zoorob D, Zarudskaya O, Van Hook J, Moussa HN. Maternal morbidity associated with skin incision type at cesarean delivery in obese patients: a systematic review. Future Sci OA. 2020;7:FSO669. doi: 10.2144/fsoa-2020-0160 PubMed DOI PMC
Venturi ML, Attinger CE, Mesbahi AN, Hess CL, Graw KS. Mechanisms and clinical applications of the vacuum‐assisted closure (VAC) device: a review. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2005;6:185‐194. doi: 10.2165/00128071-200506030-00005 PubMed DOI
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;38:553‐562. doi: 10.1097/00000637-199706000-00001 PubMed DOI
Whitty JA, Wagner AP, Kang E, et al. Cost‐effectiveness of closed incision negative pressure wound therapy in preventing surgical site infection among obese women giving birth by caesarean section: an economic evaluation (DRESSING trial). Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2023;63:673‐680. doi: 10.1111/ajo.13677 PubMed DOI PMC
Bovill E, Banwell PE, Teot L, et al. Topical negative pressure wound therapy: a review of its role and guidelines for its use in the management of acute wounds. Int Wound J. 2008;5:511‐529. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2008.00437.x PubMed DOI PMC
Negative pressure wound therapy – UpToDate n.d. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/negative‐pressure‐wound‐therapy?search=negative%20pressure%20wound%20therapy&source=search_result&selectedTitle=1%7E75&usage_type=default&display_rank=1 [accessed 18 August 2024].
Zaver V, Kankanalu P. Negative Pressure Wound Therapy. StatPearls Publishing; 2024. PubMed
Suissa D, Danino A, Nikolis A. Negative‐pressure therapy versus standard wound care: a meta‐analysis of randomized trials. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:498e‐503e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31822b675c PubMed DOI
Adamina M, Andreou A, Arezzo A, et al. EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, meta‐analysis, GRADE assessment, and evidence‐informed European recommendations on appendicitis in pregnancy. Surg Endosc. 2022;36:8699‐8712. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09625-9 PubMed DOI
Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, O'Connor JF, et al. Incidence of early loss of pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:189‐194. doi: 10.1056/nejm198807283190401 PubMed DOI
Di Saverio S, Podda M, De Simone B, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis: 2020 update of the WSES Jerusalem guidelines. World J Emerg Surg. 2020;15:27. doi: 10.1186/s13017-020-00306-3 PubMed DOI PMC
Chung JC, Cho GS, Shin EJ, Kim HC, Song OP. Clinical outcomes compared between laparoscopic and open appendectomy in pregnant women. Can J Surg. 2013;56:341‐346. doi: 10.1503/cjs.022112 PubMed DOI PMC
Asukai K, Kashiwazaki M, Koizumi K, Nobunaga T, Yano H. A case report of a 19‐week gravid patient with a dehisced abdominal wound and treated with V.A.C. ATS(®) therapy system. Int Wound J. 2016;13:992‐995. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12352 PubMed DOI PMC
Shapiro SB, Mumme DE. Use of negative pressure wound therapy in the management of wound dehiscence in a pregnant patient. Wounds. 2008;20:46‐48. PubMed
Lee J, Lee KJ, Sun WY. Necrotizing fasciitis of the breast in a pregnant woman successfully treated using negative‐pressure wound therapy. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2015;89:102‐106. doi: 10.4174/astr.2015.89.2.102 PubMed DOI PMC
Escobar‐Vidarte MF, Messa A, Nieto AJ, Echavarría MP, Carvajal JA, Fernández PA. Use of negative pressure wound therapy in surgical site infection during pregnancy: a case study. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2019;46:453‐456. doi: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000573 PubMed DOI
Tian Y, Li K, Zeng L. A systematic review with meta‐analysis on prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy versus standard dressing for obese women after caesarean section. Nurs Open. 2023;10:5999‐6013. doi: 10.1002/nop2.1912 PubMed DOI PMC
Kominiarek MA, Espinal M, Cassimatis IR, et al. Peripartum interventions for people with class III obesity: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024;6:101354. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101354 PubMed DOI
Hirata M, Hasegawa K, Kasuga Y, et al. A case of abdominal compartment syndrome caused by amniotic fluid embolism treated with ABTHERATM therapy: World's first report in the obstetric field. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;60:579‐580. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2021.03.038 PubMed DOI
Aviki EM, Batalden RP, Del Carmen MG, Berkowitz LR. Vacuum‐assisted closure for episiotomy dehiscence. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:530‐533. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000785 PubMed DOI
Topdagi Yilmaz EP, Yapca OE, Cimilli Senocak GN, Topdağı YE, Al RA. Use of vacuum‐assisted closure in massive puerperal genital hematoma. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2019;62:186‐189. doi: 10.5468/ogs.2019.62.3.186 PubMed DOI PMC
Tuuli MG, Liu J, Tita ATN, et al. Effect of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy vs standard wound dressing on surgical‐site infection in obese women after cesarean delivery: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324:1180‐1189. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.13361 PubMed DOI PMC