Skip to main content

Table 7 Summary of evidence for infected surgical wounds management

From: Seeking effective interventions to treat complex wounds: an overview of systematic reviews

Outcome

Intervention

Systematic reviews with MA

Systematic reviews without MA

High-quality*

Low/moderate quality

High-quality**

Low/moderate quality

Proportion of patients with healed wounds (MAs: 1) [37]

Topical negative pressure/vacuum-assisted closure

NA

+

NA

NA

Vacuum-assisted closure

NA

+

NA

NA

Wound area/size reduction (MAs: NA; non-MAs: 2) [71,108]

Alginate dressings

NA

NA

–

NA

Foam dressings

NA

NA

–

NA

Time to healing or rate of healing (MAs: NA; non-MAs: 5) [68,71,96,108,109]

Alginate dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

Aloe vera dermal gel (topical)

NA

NA

+/−

NA

Dextranomer polysaccharide bead dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

Foam dressings

NA

NA

–

NA

 

Gauze + Aloe vera dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

 

Honey (topical)

NA

NA

 

+

 

Hydrocolloid dressings

NA

NA

–

NA

 

Plaster casting

NA

NA

+

NA

 

Polyurethane foam and sheets dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

 

Silicone elastomer foam dressings and polyurethane foam dressings

NA

NA

–

NA

 

Topical negative pressure

NA

NA

–

NA

Ulcer healing (MAs: NA; non-MAs: 2) [71,108]

Dextranomer polysaccharide bead dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

Polyurethane foam dressings

NA

NA

+/−

NA

  1. *At least one systematic review with meta-analysis and AMSTAR score ≥8.
  2. **At least one systematic review without meta-analysis and AMSTAR score ≥8.
  3. + Effective (statistically significant difference between interventions and comparators); – No difference (no statistically significant difference between interventions and comparators); +/− Unknown (conflicting evidence between meta-analysis or indeterminate results); NA, No studies available; MA, Meta-analysis.