Original Papers - Stones and Infections

Comparison of conventional dressings and vacuum-assisted closure in the wound therapy of Fournier’s gangrene

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Received: 26 April 2017
Published: 3 October 2017
3707
Views
2334
Downloads

Authors

Objective: The purpose of our study was to compare Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) and conventional dressings in the wound therapy of Fournier’s gangrene (FG). Materials and methods: The study evaluated 54 patients, retrospectively. Following initial removal of necrotic and devitalized tissue, in Group I patients the wounds were covered with conventional antiseptic dressings and patients continued to be treated with conventional dressings. In Group II patients VAC therapy was initiated. The collected data were compared between groups. Results: The difference between two groups were statistically significant in terms of number of daily dressing (group I: 2, group II: 0,5), VAS (group I: 8, group II: 5), number of daily analgesics (group I: 4, group II: 2), number of daily narcotic analgesics (group I: 1, group II: 0), duration of mobilization per day (group I: 40, group II: 73 minutes) (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our study does not determine that a VAC therapy is better than conventional dressings in terms of clinical outcome. However, vacuum dressing appears an effective and successful method, which offers fewer dressing changes, less pain, and greater mobility comparing to conventional dressings in the management of FG patients.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite



Comparison of conventional dressings and vacuum-assisted closure in the wound therapy of Fournier’s gangrene. (2017). Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 89(3), 208-211. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2017.3.208