Conectar
We aimed to quantitatively and systematically elucidate the rationality of the examined variables as independent risk factors for sternal wound infection. We searched databases to screen studies, ascertained the variables to be analysed, extracted the data and applied meta-analysis to each qualified variable. Odds ratios and mean differences were considered to be the effect sizes for binary and continuous variables, respectively. A random-effects model was used for these procedures. The source of heterogeneity was evaluated using a meta-regression. Publication bias was tested by funnel plot and Egger's test, the significant results of which were then calculated using trim and fill analysis. We used a sensitivity analysis and bubble chart to describe their robustness. After screening all variables in the eligible literature, we excluded 55 because only one or no research found them significant after multivariate analysis, leaving 33 variables for synthesis. Two binary variables (age over 65 years, NYHA class >2) and a continuous variable (preoperative stay) were not significant after the meta-analysis. The most robust independent risk factors in our study were diabetes mellitus, obesity, use of bilateral internal thoracic arteries, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, prolonged surgery time, prolonged ventilation and critical preoperative state, followed by congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, renal insufficiency, stroke, peripheral vascular disease and use of an intra-aortic balloon pump. Relatively low-risk factors were emergent/urgent surgery, smoking, myocardial infarction, combined surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting. Sternal wound infection after open-heart surgery is a multifactorial disease. The detected risk factors significantly affected the wound healing process, but some were different in strength. Anything that affects wound healing and antibacterial ability, such as lack of oxygen, local haemodynamic disorders, malnutrition condition and compromised immune system will increase the risk, and this reminds us of comprehensive treatment during the perioperative period.
We examined whether small incision aortic root replacement could reduce the amount of blood transfusion during operation and the risk of postoperative complications. An extensive e-review of the 4 main databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science and EMBASE) was carried out to determine all the published trials by July 2023. The search terms used were associated with partial versus full sternotomy and aortic root. This analysis only included the study articles that compared partial and full sternotomy. After excluding articles based on titles or abstracts, selected full-text articles had reference lists searched for any potential further articles. We analysed a total of 2167 subjects from 10 comparable trials. The minimally invasive aortic root graft in breastbone decreased the duration of hospitalization (MD, −2.58; 95% CI, −3.15, −2.01, p < 0.0001) and intraoperative red blood cell transfusion (MD, −1.27; 95% CI, −2.34, −0.19, p = 0.02). However, there were no significant differences in wound infection (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.16, 4.93, p = 0.88), re-exploration for bleeding (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.60, 1.53, p = 0.86), intraoperative blood loss (MD, −259.19; 95% CI, −615.11, 96.73, p = 0.15) and operative time (MD, −7.39; 95% CI, −19.10, 4.32, p = 0.22); the results showed that the microsternotomy did not differ significantly from that of the routine approach. Small sternotomy may be an effective and safe substitute for the treatment of the aorta root. Nevertheless, the wide variety of data indicates that larger, well-designed studies are required to back up the current limited literature evidence showing a benefit in terms of complications like postoperative wound infections or the volume of intraoperative red blood cell transfusion.
FreshRSS 