BACKGROUND: The influence of sternal size and of inadvertent paramedian sternotomy on stability of the closure site is not well defined. METHODS: Data on 171 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery through a midline sternotomy were prospectively collected. Intraoperative measurements of sternal dimension included thickness and width at the manubrium, the third and fifth intercostal spaces; paramedian sternotomy was defined as width of one side of the sternum equaling 75% or more of the entire width, at any of the three levels. The chest was closed with simple peristernal steel wires and inspected to detect deep wound infection and/or instability for 3 postoperative months. The sternal factors and several patient/surgery–related factors were included in a multivariate analysis model to identify factors affecting stability. An electromechanical traction test was conducted on 6 rewired sternal models after midline or paramedian sternotomy and separation data were analyzed. RESULTS: Chest instability was detected in 12 (7%) patients and wound infection in 2 (1.2%). Patient weight (P = .03), depressed left ventricular function (P = .04), sternum thickness (indexed to body weight, P = .03), and paramedian sternotomy (P = .0001) were risk factors of postoperative instability; paramedian sternotomy was the only independent predictor (P = .001). The electromechanical test showed more lateral displacement of the two rewired sternal halves after paramedian than midline sternotomy (P = .002); accordingly, load at fracture point was lower after paramedian sternotomy (220 ± 20 N vs 545 ± 25 N, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inadvertent paramedian sternomoty strongly affects postoperative chest wound stability independently from sternal size, requiring prompt reinforcement of chest closure.

Influence of sternal size and inadvertent paramedian sternotomy on stability of the closure site: a clinical and mechanical study.

PENTA DE PEPPO, Alfonso;
2006

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The influence of sternal size and of inadvertent paramedian sternotomy on stability of the closure site is not well defined. METHODS: Data on 171 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery through a midline sternotomy were prospectively collected. Intraoperative measurements of sternal dimension included thickness and width at the manubrium, the third and fifth intercostal spaces; paramedian sternotomy was defined as width of one side of the sternum equaling 75% or more of the entire width, at any of the three levels. The chest was closed with simple peristernal steel wires and inspected to detect deep wound infection and/or instability for 3 postoperative months. The sternal factors and several patient/surgery–related factors were included in a multivariate analysis model to identify factors affecting stability. An electromechanical traction test was conducted on 6 rewired sternal models after midline or paramedian sternotomy and separation data were analyzed. RESULTS: Chest instability was detected in 12 (7%) patients and wound infection in 2 (1.2%). Patient weight (P = .03), depressed left ventricular function (P = .04), sternum thickness (indexed to body weight, P = .03), and paramedian sternotomy (P = .0001) were risk factors of postoperative instability; paramedian sternotomy was the only independent predictor (P = .001). The electromechanical test showed more lateral displacement of the two rewired sternal halves after paramedian than midline sternotomy (P = .002); accordingly, load at fracture point was lower after paramedian sternotomy (220 ± 20 N vs 545 ± 25 N, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inadvertent paramedian sternomoty strongly affects postoperative chest wound stability independently from sternal size, requiring prompt reinforcement of chest closure.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11591/187201
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 38
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 36
social impact