[Examination of the opportunity costs and turnover situation in patients with deep sternal infections]

Defining post-sternotomy mediastinitis for clinical evidence-based studies

Background

Considerable advances have already been made in the treatment of deep thoracic wound infections following a median sternotomy for cardiac surgery. Further improvement in diagnosis, treatment, and outcome will require a targeted approach by multidisciplinary teams. Clear communication and synergy between the various clinical and supportive disciplines would assist in removing the last barriers to standardized evidence-based studies and the development of improved evidence-based guidelines.

Methods

An extensive literature search without language restrictions was carried out on PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Web of Science, covering the period 1988 to week 16, 2014, and a manual search of the reference lists was performed regarding all possible definitions and classifications of post-sternotomy mediastinitis. Two hundred and eighteen papers describing post-sternotomy infections in a multitude of terms were identified, and the strengths and weaknesses of the most popular definitions and terms relating specifically to post-sternotomy infections were examined.

Results

This study revealed that clinicians use a multitude of terms to describe post-sternotomy infections without defining the condition under treatment. Occasionally, older epidemiological (surveillance) definitions were used. It also shows that supportive disciplines have their own definitions, or interpretations of existing definitions, to describe these infections.

Conclusion

The outcome of this study is that clinicians have adopted no single definition, which is essential for further improvement for evidence-based studies. We suggest that it is possible to adopt a single term for thoracic infection after a sternotomy (and only sternotomy), and propose a clinical definition for this purpose.

Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery: Evidences and controversies

Despite many advances in prevention and perioperative care, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) remains a pressing concern in cardiac surgery, with a still relevant incidence and with a considerable impact on in-hospital mortality and also on mid- and long-term survival. The permanent high impact of this complication is partially related to the increasing proportion of patients at high-risk for infection, as well as to the many patient and surgical risk factors involved in the pathogenesis of DSWI. The prophylactic antibiotic therapy is one of the most important tools in the prevention of DSWI. However, the choice of antibiotic, the dose, the duration, the adequate levels in serum and tissue, and the timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis are still controversial. The treatment of DSWI ranges from surgical revision with primary closure to surgical revision with open dressings or closed irrigation, from reconstruction with soft tissue flaps to negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). However, to date, there have been no accepted recommendations regarding the best management of DSWI. Emerging evidence in the literature has validated the efficacy and safety of NPWT either as a single-line therapy, or as a “bridge” prior to final surgical closure. In conclusion, the careful control of patient and surgical risk factors - when possible, the proper antimicrobial prophylaxis, and the choice of validated techniques of treatment could contribute to keep DSWIs at a minimal rate.

Poststernotomy mediastinitis: a classification to initiate and evaluate reconstructive management based on evidence from a structured review

Early recognition and, where possible, avoidance of risk factors that contribute to the development of poststernotomy mediastinitis (PSM) form the basis for successful prevention. Once the presence of PSM is diagnosed, the known risk factors have been shown to have limited influence on management decisions. Evidence-based knowledge on treatment decisions, which include the extent and type of surgical intervention (other than debridement), timing and others is available but has not yet been incorporated into a classification on management decisions regarding PSM. Ours is a first attempt at developing a classification system for management of PSM, taking the various evidence-based reconstructive options into consideration. The classification is simple to introduce (there are four Types) and relies on the careful establishment of two variables (sternal stability and sternal bone viability and stock) prior to deciding on the best available reconstructive option. It should allow better insight into why treatment decisions fail or have to be altered and will allow better comparison of treatment outcomes between various institutions.