Abdullah TOK, Alev ÖZER, Serdar ÖZER, Şakir AYDOĞDU, Erkan MAVİGÖK, Mustafa Kemal ÖZEL
Çukurova Anestezi ve Cerrahi Bilimler Dergisi - 2026;9(3):1217-1223
Objective: To compare clinical characteristics, microbiological findings, and wound management outcomes between negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and conventional wound care in patients with complicated postoperative obstetric and gynecologic wounds. Materials and Methods: This retrospective comparative study included 114 patients who developed postoperative wound infection, wound dehiscence, or other complicated surgical wounds following obstetric or gynecologic surgery between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019. Group 1 comprised 54 patients treated with NPWT, and Group 2 comprised 60 patients managed with conventional wound care. Demographic characteristics, surgical indications, inflammatory parameters, wound characteristics, microbiological findings, timing of wound complications, length of hospital stay, and wound closure strategies were compared between the groups. Results: Patients in Group 1 were significantly older than those in Group 2 (51.6 +/- 11.1 vs. 35.7 +/- 11.4 years; p<0.001), whereas body mass index did not differ significantly (36.1 +/- 7.2 vs. 32.4 +/- 7.4 kg/m²; p=0.135). The distribution of surgical indications differed significantly between the groups (p<0.001). The postoperative interval to wound dehiscence (7.3 +/- 3.4 vs. 10.2 +/- 7.5 days; p=0.153), admission C-reactive protein levels (93.6 +/- 61.9 vs. 69.7 +/- 62.4; p=0.245), and length of hospital stay (19.9 +/- 5.6 vs. 21.5 +/- 5.6 days; p=0.398) were comparable. NPWT was initiated at a mean of 8.4 +/- 3.6 days after surgery. Positive wound cultures were less frequent in Group 1 than in Group 2 (55.6% vs. 75.0%; p=0.029), as was cellulitis (16.7% vs. 45.0%; p=0.001). Incision type also differed between groups (p=0.008), whereas wound depth did not (p=0.293). Closure information was incompletely reported and was therefore interpreted cautiously. Conclusion: In this retrospective comparative cohort, therapeutic NPWT was used in patients with complicated postoperative obstetric and gynecologic wounds without a significant difference in length of hospital stay compared with conventional wound care. Lower wound-culture positivity and cellulitis rates were observed in the NPWT group; however, because treatment allocation was non-randomized and the groups differed substantially in age, surgical indication, and incision type, these associations should not be interpreted as evidence of a causal antimicrobial or clinical benefit of NPWT. Prospective studies with larger and more homogeneous populations are warranted to further define the therapeutic role of NPWT in this clinical setting.
