Negative Pressure Wound Therapy With Low Pressure and Gauze Dressings to Treat Diabetic Foot Wounds

Abstract

This study was a prospective cohort study to evaluate negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with low pressure and a gauze dressing to treat diabetic foot wounds. Thirty patients with diabetic foot wounds were consented to a prospective study to evaluate wound closure and complications to evaluate NPWT with low pressure (80 mmHg) and a gauze dressing interface (EZCare, Smith and Nephew) for up to 5 weeks. NPWT was changed 3 times a week. Study subjects were evaluated once a week for adverse events and wound measurements. Of study subjects, 43% attained at least a 50% wound area reduction after 4 weeks of therapy. Our results suggest that a high rate of wound closure could be expected with low pressure and a gauze interface.

Keywords: amputation; diabetes; infection; negative pressure; ulceration.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: LAL has research funding from Smith and Nephew, KCI, Innovative Therapies Inc, Convatec and Thermoteck; is on the Scientific Advisory Board of Innovative Therapies Inc; and is part of the Speaker’s Bureau of Smith and Nephew. DPM has research funding from Smith and Nephew. PJK has research funding from KCI. JL has research funding from Smith and Nephew, KCI, Innovative Therapies Inc, and Convatec and is part of the Speaker’s Bureau of Shire and Smith and Nephew. KED has research funding from Innovative Therapies Inc, Convatec, and Thermoteck.

© 2014 Diabetes Technology Society.

Figures

Figure 1.

Wound size and wound volume for all study subjects.

Figure 2.

Percentage wound area reduction and percentage wound volume reduction compared to baseline for all subjects.

Figure 3.

Percentage wound area reduction and percentage wound volume reduction compared to baseline for responders and nonresponders. Responders were defined as patients who achieved at least a 50% wound area reduction in 4 weeks. Nonresponders had P = .01.