Evidence Hub

Contemporary management of the open abdomen: standards, challenges, and future directions

Kňazovický M, Kováč I, Romžová B, Šimon R, Kaťuchová J

Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2026

Abstract

Objective: The open abdomen (OA) is a key strategy in damage control surgery (DCS) for severe intra-abdominal pathology but is associated with considerable morbidity, including enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF) and failure of fascial closure. This narrative review summarizes current evidence on indications, temporary abdominal closure (TAC), timing of closure, and supportive care.

Methods: A structured PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science search was performed up to January 2025 in accordance with PRISMA principles. Relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical guidelines, registry analyses, and prospective studies published in English were included. Given the narrative design, no meta-analysis was conducted.

Results: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) combined with dynamic fascial traction represents a preferred TAC strategy, achieving primary closure rates up to 80-90% in selected patients. Early fascial closure (within 5-7 days) is associated with fewer complications, particularly EAF. Early enteral nutrition (24-48 h), when feasible, may support fascial approximation. However, available evidence is largely observational and heterogeneous, with substantial inter-institutional variability.

Conclusion: Optimal OA management requires appropriate indication, standardized TAC strategies, and a proactive approach to early closure. When primary closure is not feasible, a planned ventral hernia remains a safe alternative. High-quality prospective studies are…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free