• Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd · Jan 2010

    [Endoscopic vein-graft harvesting for coronary bypass grafting: good results in patients at risk for surgical site infection].

    • Muhammad U Z Ikram, Wilson W L Li, Patrique Segers, Jaap J Kloek, and Bas A de Mol.
    • Academisch Medisch Centrum/Universiteit van Amsterdam, afd. Cardiothoracale chirurgie, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
    • Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2010 Jan 1; 154: A1806.

    ObjectiveTo determine the clinical impact of endoscopic vein-graft harvesting in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) who are at risk for surgical site infection.DesignRetrospective cohort study.MethodOf patients undergoing elective CABG between March 1st 2006 and March 1st 2007, 335 were eligible for analysis. The results of endoscopic vein-graft harvesting were compared with traditional open vein-graft harvesting. Medical records of all patients were reviewed and data collection was completed by means of a telephone survey. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of surgical site infections. Secondary outcome measures were duration of hospital stay, patient satisfaction and quality of life.ResultsAmong the 335 patients included the incidence of surgical site infection was 2.5% following open harvesting (n = 236) and 2.0% following endoscopic harvesting (n = 99; p = 0.08). Patients in the endoscopic harvesting group had more risk factors for surgical site infection (diabetes, peripheral artery disease, obesity). Surgical site infection after open harvesting resulted in a prolonged hospital stay and a higher number of patients undergoing open wound treatment, re-admittance and additional surgical procedures. Total mean hospital stay in the open harvesting group was 7.9 days and 6.1 days in the endoscopic harvesting group (p < 0.05). Patients were more satisfied with the surgical wound after endoscopic harvesting compared with open harvesting (patient satisfaction score: 8.6 versus 7.8; p < 0.001).ConclusionEndoscopic vein-graft harvesting resulted in a - statistically non-significant - lower incidence of surgical site infection than open harvesting, although the patients had a higher risk for infections. Infections in the endoscopic harvesting group were less severe. The hospital stay was shorter and the patient satisfaction was higher than in the open harvesting group.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…