Sternal wound closure in the current era: the need of a tailored approach
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, ISSN: 1863-6713, Vol: 67, Issue: 11, Page: 907-916
2019
- 30Citations
- 54Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations30
- Citation Indexes30
- 30
- CrossRef21
- Captures54
- Readers54
- 54
Review Description
Objective: Median sternotomy remains the most common access to perform cardiac surgery procedures. However, the experience of the operating surgeon remains a crucial factor during sternal closure to avoid potential complications related to poor sternal healing, such as mediastinitis. Considering the lack of major randomized controlled trials and the heterogeneity of the current literature, this narrative review aims to summarize the different techniques and approaches to sternal closure with the aim to investigate their reflections into clinical outcomes and to inform the choice on the most effective closure method after median sternotomy. Methods: A literature search through PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, and Web of Science from its inception up to April 2019 using the following search keywords in various combinations: sternal, sternotomy, mediastinitis, deep sternal wound infection, cardiac surgery, closure. Results: Single wire fixation methods, at present, seems the most useful method to perform sternal closure in routine patients, although patients with a fragile sternum might benefit more from a figure-of-eight technique. In high-risk patients (e.g. chronic pulmonary disease, obesity, bilateral internal mammary artery harvesting, diabetes, off-midline sternotomy), rigid plate fixation is currently the most effective method, if available; alternatively, weave techniques could be used. Conclusion: The choice among the sternal closure techniques should be mainly inspired and tailored on the patient’s characteristics, and correct judgement and experience play a pivotal role. A decisional algorithm has been proposed as an attempt to overcome the absence of specific guidelines and to guide the operative approach. This operative approach might be used also in non-cardiac procedure in which median sternotomy is required, such as in case of thoracic surgery.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85073654629&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11748-019-01204-5; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31531834; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11748-019-01204-5; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11748-019-01204-5; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11748-019-01204-5
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know