Clinical and economic impact of incisional negative pressure wound therapy in breast surgery: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Wound complications after breast surgery are common and contribute to morbidity and healthcare costs. The economic value of prophylactic incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) remains uncertain. This study evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of iNPWT in preventing postoperative wound complications (freedom from complication) following breast surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched without any restrictions up to 5 March 2025. Randomized trials and prospective or retrospective cohort studies comparing prophylactic iNPWT with standard dressings were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias (RoB 2, ROBINS-I), and graded evidence certainty (GRADE). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed, and cost-effectiveness modelling focused on surgical site infection (SSI). RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies including 4904 patients (1817 iNPWT; 3087 controls) were analysed. iNPWT was associated with higher rates of wound dehiscence prevention (RR 1.07, 95% c.i. 1.03 to 1.12), SSI prevention (RR 1.05, 95% c.i. 1.01 to 1.09), and skin necrosis prevention (RR 1.07, 95% c.i. 1.01 to 1.15). No significant differences were observed for seroma, nipple-areolar complex necrosis, or haematoma. Across outcomes, heterogeneity was substantial and 95% prediction intervals crossed the null, indicating uncertainty in the direction of effect in future settings. Evidence certainty ranged from low to moderate. Cost modelling suggested that iNPWT may be cost-saving only in settings with high SSI-related costs. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence does not establish consistent clinical benefit of prophylactic iNPWT in breast surgery. Cost-effectiveness appears limited to high-risk or high-cost contexts, supporting selective use.