A PROSPECTIVE STUDY TO COMPARE THE EFFICACY OF NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY AND CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF OPEN ABDOMEN

Abstract

Introduction: Open abdomen refers to leaving abdominal wall unclosed after surgery or reopening due to abdominal compartment syndrome, severe infection, or trauma. It may result from damage control surgery, initially developed for trauma but now used broadly. It helps manage sepsis, prevent hypertension complications. Bjorck classified it into grades one to four. Aims: To compare the outcomes of open abdomen closure using Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) versus primary laparostomy, and to evaluate and compare the incidence, types of complications, and mortality between the two treatment approaches. Materials and methods: This prospective comparative study evaluated patients with open abdomen managed by NPWT or primary laparostomy. Clinical data, including demographics, surgical details, complications, hospital stay, and mortality, were recorded and statistically analyzed to compare outcomes between groups. Result: Group A (NPWT) showed better outcomes than Group B. Hospital stay, delayed primary closure, secondary healing, and enteral feeding were significantly shorter in Group A (p<0.0001). Ventral hernia (p=0.03) and overall complications (p=0.001) were lower in Group A, while mortality was not significant (p=0.334). Conclusion: The study concludes that negative pressure wound therapy is a safe and effective method for managing post-laparotomy wound dehiscence and open abdomen, offering improved primary closure rates, shorter hospital stay, faster wound healing, and earlier return to enteral feeding compared to conventional treatment.