Comparison of early and delayed removal of dressing following primary closure of clean and contaminated surgical wounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Zhang,Taijuan; Zhang,Fujie; Chen,Zongnan; Cheng,Xiuling

doi:10.3892/etm.2020.8591

Comparison of early and delayed removal of dressing following primary closure of clean and contaminated surgical wounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Authors:
- Taijuan Zhang
- Fujie Zhang
- Zongnan Chen
- Xiuling Cheng
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Wound Treatment Center, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China, Department of General Surgery, Tianjin Fifth Central Hospital, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China, Department of Nursing, Tianjin Fifth Central Hospital, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China
Published online on: March 11, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8591
Pages: 3219-3226
Copyright : © Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY 4.0].

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The usefulness of dressing a surgical wound beyond the first 24-48 h of surgery is currently a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the early and delayed removal of dressing following primary closure in the management of clean and contaminated surgical wounds. Systematic searches were conducted in various databases including Medline, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and Embase from January, 1964 until October, 2019. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the quality of published trials. We carried out a meta-analysis with random-effects model and reported pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In total, we analysed 10 studies with 1,708 participants. All the studies were randomized controlled trials, while the majority of studies had unclear or high bias risks. Early dressing removal was favoured with respect to surgical site infection (pooled RR=0.89; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.29), patient's perception on safety (pooled RR=0.60; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.76) and comfort (pooled RR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.22), while the remaining outcomes favoured delayed dressing removal. However, none of the factors had statistically significant difference between two interventions except the patient's perception on safety. To summarize, delayed removal of dressing is not superior to early removal following primary closure of clean or clean-contaminated surgical wounds.

View Figures

View References

1	García-Gubern CF, Colon-Rolon L and Bond MC: Essential concepts of wound management. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 28:951–967. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Ahn HB, Shin DM, Roh MS, Jeung WJ, Park WC and Rho SH: A comparison of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate adhesives versus conventional suture materials for eyelid wound closure in rabbits. Korean J Ophthalmol. 25:121–127. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Biancari F and Tiozzo V: Staples versus sutures for closing leg wounds after vein graft harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 5(CD008057)2010.doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008057. PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Hasan Z, Gangopadhyay AN, Gupta DK, Srivastava P and Sharma SP: Sutureless skin closure with isoamyl 2-cyanoacrylate in pediatric day-care surgery. Pediatr Surg Int. 25:1123–1125. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Lawrence WT: Physiology of the acute wound. Clin Plast Surg. 25:321–340. 1998.PubMed/NCBI
6	Hutchinson JJ and Lawrence JC: Wound infection under occlusive dressings. J Hosp Infect. 17:83–94. 1991.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Mertz PM, Marshall DA and Eaglstein WH: Occlusive wound dressings to prevent bacterial invasion and wound infection. J Am Acad Dermatol. 12:662–668. 1985.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Ubbink DT, Vermeulen H, Goossens A, Kelner RB, Schreuder SM and Lubbers MJ: Occlusive vs gauze dressings for local wound care in surgical patients: A randomized clinical trial. Arch Surg. 143:950–955. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Dyson M, Young S, Pendle CL, Webster DF and Lang SM: Comparison of the effects of moist and dry conditions on dermal repair. J Invest Dermatol. 91:434–439. 1988.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Cutting KF and White RJ: Maceration of the skin and wound bed. 1: Its nature and causes. J Wound Care. 11:275–278. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Merei JM: Pediatric clean surgical wounds: Is dressing necessary? J Pediatr Surg. 39:1871–1873. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Chrintz H, Vibits H, Cordtz TO, Harreby JS, Waaddegaard P and Larsen SO: Need for surgical wound dressing. Br J Surg. 76:204–205. 1989.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Dosseh Eacute Koué D, Doleaglenou A, Fortey YK and Ayite AE: Randomized trial comparing dressing to no dressing of surgical wounds in a tropical setting. J Chir (Paris). 145:143–146. 2008.(In French). PubMed/NCBI
14	Gwosdow AR, Cunningham JJ, Lydon M, Rascati R and Berglund LG: Evaporative water losses through a temporary wound dressing under simulated wound conditions. J Burn Care Rehabil. 14:450–454. 1993.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Ajao OG: Surgical wound infection: A comparison between dressed and undressed wounds. J Trop Med Hyg. 80:192–196. 1977.PubMed/NCBI
16	Mendes DA, Veiga DF, Veiga-Filho J, Loyola ABAT, Paiva LF, Novo NF, Sabino-Neto M and Ferreira LM: Influence of dressing application time after breast augmentation on cutaneous colonization: A randomized clinical trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 71:906–912. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Nesrallah M, Cole P and Kiley K: The effect of timing of removal of wound dressing on surgical site infection rate after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 129:148–149. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Peleg D, Eberstark E, Warsof SL, Cohen N and Ben Shachar I: Early wound dressing removal after scheduled cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 215(388.e1-388.e5)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Ramkumar S, Narayanan V and Laing JHE: Twenty-four hours or 10 days? A prospective randomised controlled trial in children comparing head bandages following pinnaplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 59:969–974. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Ritting AW, Leger R, O'Malley MP, Mogielnicki H, Tucker R and Rodner CM: Duration of postoperative dressing after mini-open carpal tunnel release: A prospective, randomized trial. J Hand Surg Am. 37:3–8. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Veiga DF, Damasceno CAV, Veiga-Filho J, Paiva LF, Fonseca FE, Cabral IV, Pinto NL, Juliano Y and Ferreira LM: Dressing wear time after breast reconstruction: A randomized clinical trial. PLoS One. 11(e0166356)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Veiga-Filho J, Veiga DF, Sabino-Neto M, Damasceno CA, Sales EM, Garcia ES, Oliveira IB, De Simoni LF, Juliano Y and Ferreira LM: Dressing wear time after reduction mammaplasty: A randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 129(1e-7e)2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
23	Wipke-Tevis DD and Stotts NA: Effect of dressings on saphenous vein harvest incision pain, distress and cosmetic result. Prog Cardiovasc Nurs. 13:3–13. 1998.PubMed/NCBI
24	Toon CD, Lusuku C, Ramamoorthy R, Davidson BR and Gurusamy KS: Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean-contaminated surgical wounds. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 3(CD010259)2015.doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010259. PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
25	Sood A, Granick MS and Tomaselli NL: Wound Dressings and Comparative Effectiveness Data. Adv Wound Care. 8:511–529. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
26	Gethin G and Cowman S: Manuka honey vs. hydrogel -a prospective, open label, multicentre, randomized controlled trial to compare desloughing efficacy and healing outcomes in venous ulcers. J Clin Nurs. 18:466–474. 2009.
27	Gupta SS, Singh O, Bhagel PS, et al: Honey dressings versus silver sulfadiazine dressing for wound healing in burn patients: A retrospective study. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 4:183–187. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar