(CR-041) Evaluating Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy Use Following High-Risk Caesarean Section in a Middle East Population

Friday, April 10, 2026

Alexa Russell, MS; Hatem Abdelhamid Abdelrahman, MD; Hadeel Al-Khannaq, MD; Lobna ElSayed Hamouda, MD; Aishah Abdullah, MD; Minimole Omana Amma, MD; Siobhan Lookess, BSc, PGDip

Introduction: Rates of caesarean section have been increasing over the past decade.^1,2 If surgical site complications (SSCs) develop following caesarean section, maternal morbidity and mortality may be greatly impacted. P</span>ostoperative incision management strategies such as closed incision negative pressure (ciNPT*), have been used to mitigate post-surgical complications. However, limited evidence exists on the use of ciNPT over caesarean section incisions in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The effect of ciNPT in the management of closed incisions following caesarean section was examined.

Methods: Patients underwent caesarean section between 2022 and 2024 at a single acute care hospital in the UAE. All 82 patients underwent vaginal cleansing and received antibiotics prior to surgery. A Pfannenstiel incision was used, followed by closure with subcuticular suturing. Patients received either traditional silver dressings (SOC, n=28) or ciNPT (n=54) for postoperative care. SOC dressings remained in place for 3-7 days, while ciNPT dressings were changed every 5-7 days. Patient and incision outcomes were assessed at each dressing change. Means and standard deviations were generated for continuous variables, while counts and frequencies were generated for categorical variables. Two sample t-tests compared continuous variables and Fisher Exact tests compared categorical variables.

Results:

There were no significant differences between the ciNPT and SOC groups for baseline demographics; however, the ciNPT group had a higher proportion of severely obese patients (body mass index > 40 kg/m²) and patients who had two or more previous caesarean deliveries. The ciNPT group had a lower SSC rate compared to the SOC group (0/54 [0%] vs. 6/21 [21%], respectively; p=0.0011), as well as a lower number of surgical site infections (0/54 [0%] vs. 3/28 [11%]; p=0.037) and deep infections (0/54 [0%] vs. 3/28 [11%]; p=0.037).

Discussion:

In this patient population, ciNPT was well tolerated and may help improve clinical outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing caesarean delivery. Study limitations include retrospective design and potential selection bias, as only high-risk patients were included in the study. Large-scale randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.