ABSTRACT
The damage control surgery, with emphasis on laparostomy, usually results in shrinkage of the aponeurosis and loss of the ability to close the abdominal wall, leading to the formation of ventral incisional hernias. Currently, various techniques offer greater chances of closing the abdominal cavity with less tension. Thus, this study aims to evaluate three temporary closure techniques of the abdominal cavity: the Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy - VAC, the Bogotá Bag and the Vacuum-pack. We conducted a systematic review of the literature, selecting 28 articles published in the last 20 years. The techniques of the bag Bogotá and Vacuum-pack had the advantage of easy access to the material in most centers and low cost, contrary to VAC, which, besides presenting high cost, is not available in most hospitals. On the other hand, the VAC technique was more effective in reducing stress at the edges of lesions, removing stagnant fluids and waste, in addition to acting at the cellular level by increasing proliferation and cell division rates, and showed the highest rates of primary closure of the abdominal cavity. RESUMO A cirurgia de controle de danos, com ênfase em peritoneostomia, geralmente resulta em retração da aponeurose e perda da capacidade de fechar a parede abdominal, levando à formação de hérnias ventrais incisionais. Atualmente, várias técnicas oferecem maiores chances de fechamento da cavidade abdominal, com menor tensão. Deste modo, este estudo tem por objetivo avaliar três técnicas de fechamento temporário da cavidade abdominal: fechamento a vácuo (Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy - VAC), Bolsa de Bogotá e Vacuum-pack. Realizou-se uma revisão sistemática da literatura com seleção de 28 artigos publicados nos últimos 20 anos. As técnicas de Bolsa de Bogotá e Vacuum-pack tiveram como vantagem o acesso fácil ao material, na maioria dos centros, e baixo custo, ao contrário do que se observa na terapia a vácuo, VAC, que além de apresentar alto custo, não está disponível em grande parte dos hospitais. A técnica VAC, por outro lado, foi mais eficaz na redução da tensão nas bordas das lesões, ao remover fluidos estagnados e detritos, além de exercer ação a nível celular, aumentando as taxas de proliferação e divisão celular, e apresentou as maiores taxas de fechamento primário da cavidade abdominal.
Subject(s)
Abdominal Wound Closure Techniques , Abdominal Cavity , Humans , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/methods , Polyvinyl Chloride , Time FactorsABSTRACT
ABSTRACT The damage control surgery, with emphasis on laparostomy, usually results in shrinkage of the aponeurosis and loss of the ability to close the abdominal wall, leading to the formation of ventral incisional hernias. Currently, various techniques offer greater chances of closing the abdominal cavity with less tension. Thus, this study aims to evaluate three temporary closure techniques of the abdominal cavity: the Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy - VAC, the Bogotá Bag and the Vacuum-pack. We conducted a systematic review of the literature, selecting 28 articles published in the last 20 years. The techniques of the bag Bogotá and Vacuum-pack had the advantage of easy access to the material in most centers and low cost, contrary to VAC, which, besides presenting high cost, is not available in most hospitals. On the other hand, the VAC technique was more effective in reducing stress at the edges of lesions, removing stagnant fluids and waste, in addition to acting at the cellular level by increasing proliferation and cell division rates, and showed the highest rates of primary closure of the abdominal cavity.
RESUMO A cirurgia de controle de danos, com ênfase em peritoneostomia, geralmente resulta em retração da aponeurose e perda da capacidade de fechar a parede abdominal, levando à formação de hérnias ventrais incisionais. Atualmente, várias técnicas oferecem maiores chances de fechamento da cavidade abdominal, com menor tensão. Deste modo, este estudo tem por objetivo avaliar três técnicas de fechamento temporário da cavidade abdominal: fechamento a vácuo (Vacuum-Assisted Closure Therapy - VAC), Bolsa de Bogotá e Vacuum-pack. Realizou-se uma revisão sistemática da literatura com seleção de 28 artigos publicados nos últimos 20 anos. As técnicas de Bolsa de Bogotá e Vacuum-pack tiveram como vantagem o acesso fácil ao material, na maioria dos centros, e baixo custo, ao contrário do que se observa na terapia a vácuo, VAC, que além de apresentar alto custo, não está disponível em grande parte dos hospitais. A técnica VAC, por outro lado, foi mais eficaz na redução da tensão nas bordas das lesões, ao remover fluidos estagnados e detritos, além de exercer ação a nível celular, aumentando as taxas de proliferação e divisão celular, e apresentou as maiores taxas de fechamento primário da cavidade abdominal.
Subject(s)
Humans , Abdominal Wound Closure Techniques , Polyvinyl Chloride , Time Factors , Abdominal Cavity , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/methodsABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the 3 main techniques of temporary closure of the abdominal cavity, vacuum assisted closure (vacuum-assisted closure therapy - VAC), Bogota bag and Barker technique, in damage control surgery. METHODS: After systematic review of the literature, 33 articles were selected to compare the efficiency of the three procedures. Criteria such as cost, infections, capacity of reconstruction of the abdominal wall, diseases associated with the technique, among others were analyzed. RESULTS: The Bogota bag and Barker techniques present as advantage the availability of material and low cost, what is not observed in the VAC procedure. The VAC technique is the most efficient, not only because it reduces the tension on the boarders of the lesion, but also removes stagnant fluids and debris and acts at cellular level increasing cell proliferation and division. Bogota bag presents the higher rates of skin laceration and evisceration, greater need for a stent for draining fluids and wash-ups, higher rates of intestinal adhesion to the abdominal wall. The Barker technique presents lack of efficiency in closing the abdominal wall and difficulty on maintaining pressure on the dressing. The VAC dressing can generate irritation and dermatitis when the drape is applied, in addition to pain, infection and bleeding, as well as toxic shock syndrome, anaerobic sepsis and thrombosis. CONCLUSION: The VAC technique, showed to be superior allowing a better control of liquid on the third space, avoiding complications such as fistula with small mortality, low infection rate, and easier capability on primary closure of the abdominal cavity.