• Marisa De Feo, Alessandro Della Corte, Mariano Vicchio, Francesco Pirozzi, Gianantonio Nappi, and Maurizio Cotrufo.
• Department of Cardio-Thoracic Sciences, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
• Tex Heart Inst J. 2011 Jan 1; 38 (4): 375-80.

AbstractIn this study, we reviewed a 15-year experience with the treatment of a severe sequela of cardiac surgery: post-sternotomy mediastinitis. We compared the outcomes of conventional treatment with those of negative-pressure wound therapy, focusing on mortality rate, sternal reinfection, and length of hospital stay.We reviewed data on 157 consecutive patients who were treated at our institution from 1995 through 2010 for post-sternotomy mediastinitis after cardiac surgery. Of these patients, 74 had undergone extensive wound débridement followed by negative-pressure wound therapy, and 83 had undergone conventional treatment, including primary wound reopening, débridement, closed-chest irrigation without rewiring, topical application of granulated sugar for recurrent cases, and final plastic reconstruction with pectoral muscle flap in most cases.The 2 study groups were homogeneous in terms of preoperative data and operative variables (the primary cardiac surgery was predominantly coronary artery bypass grafting). Negative-pressure wound therapy was associated with lower early mortality rates (1.4% vs 3.6%; P = 0.35) and significantly lower reinfection rates (1.4% vs 16.9%; P = 0.001). Significantly shorter hospital stays were also observed with negative pressure in comparison with conventional treatment (mean durations, 27.3 ± 9 vs 30.5 ± 3 d; P = 0.02), consequent to the accelerated process of wound healing with negative-pressure therapy.Lower mortality and reinfection rates and shorter hospital stays can result from using negative pressure rather than conventional treatment. Therefore, negative-pressure wound therapy is advisable as first-choice therapy for deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery.

39 keywords...

hide…