부산대학교 도서관

Purpose: The choice of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) method affects the prognosis of trauma patients. Previous studies on TAC are challenging to extrapolate due to data heterogeneity. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and comparison of various TAC techniques. Methods: We accessed web-based databases for studies on the clinical outcomes of TAC techniques. Recognized techniques, including negative-pressure wound therapy with or without continuous fascial traction, skin tension, meshes, Bogota bags, and Wittman patches, were classified via a method of closure such as skin-only closure vs. patch closure vs. vacuum closure; and via dynamics of treatment like static therapy (ST) vs. dynamic therapy (DT). Study endpoints included in-hospital mortality, definitive fascial closure (DFC) rate, and incidence of intraabdominal complications. Results: Among 1,065 identified studies, 37 papers comprising 2,582 trauma patients met the inclusion criteria. The vacuum closure group showed the lowest mortality (13%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6%–19%) and a moderate DFC rate (74%; 95% CI, 67%–82%). The skin-only closure group showed the highest mortality (35%; 95% CI, 7%–63%) and the highest DFC rate (96%; 95% CI, 93%–99%). In the second group analysis, DT showed better outcomes than ST for all endpoints. Conclusion: Vacuum closure was favorable in terms of in-hospital mortality, ventral hernia, and peritoneal abscess. Skinonly closure might be an alternative TAC method in carefully selected groups. DT may provide the best results; however, further studies are needed.