Esraa Asaad Abdelmaqsoud Shaban
Demonstrator
Negative pressure wound therapy versus conventional therapy for the treatment of post-coronary artery bypass graft mediastinitis
• 2024
Publication Information
Authors
Mohamed Ahmed Elgazzar, Ibrahim Reda Kasab, Mohamed Mohamed Saffan, Esraa
Asaad Abdel-Maqsoud, Moataz EL-Shahaat Rezk
Keywords
Not Available
Journal
Not Available
Publisher
Not Available
Volume
Not Available
Issue
Not Available
Pages
Not Available
publication.type
Local
Paper Link
Not Available
Supplementary Materials
Not Available
Abstract
Background: Various treatments, such as negative pressure wound therapy or
traditional therapy, can be employed to manage postoperative mediastinitis. The
superiority of one approach over the other is still a subject of discussion. Our
purpose was to compare the results of negative pressure wound therapy and
conventional therapy for treating postcoronary artery bypass graft mediastinitis.
Methods: This study included 50 individuals with mediastinitis after coronary
artery bypass grafting. Patients were divided into Groups A and B according to
whether the wound was treated with negative pressure wound therapy (n= 25) or
conventional therapy (n= 25), respectively.
Results: The studied groups were comparable concerning age (P = 0.5), sex (P =
0.395), and body mass index (P = 0.556). No significant differences were detected
among the studied groups concerning diabetes mellitus (P = 0.733), chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.564), previous myocardial infarction (P =
0.370), isolated or combined surgery (P = 0.508), left main stenosis (P = 0.569), or
emergency surgery (P = 0.508). Group A exhibited a significantly shorter hospital
stay (26 ±4 days) than Group B (37 ±6) (P < 0.001). In contrast, no significant
differences were observed among the studied groups concerning ventilation hours
(P = 0.913) or ICU stay (P = 0.524). Group A demonstrated significantly lower
reinfection than Group B (24% vs. 52%, respectively; P = 0.041). No significant
differences were noted concerning reoperation for bleeding (P = 1.0) or mortality
(P = 0.1). Group A demonstrated a significantly lower mean cost than Group B
(110±23 vs. 140 ±37, respectively; P =
traditional therapy, can be employed to manage postoperative mediastinitis. The
superiority of one approach over the other is still a subject of discussion. Our
purpose was to compare the results of negative pressure wound therapy and
conventional therapy for treating postcoronary artery bypass graft mediastinitis.
Methods: This study included 50 individuals with mediastinitis after coronary
artery bypass grafting. Patients were divided into Groups A and B according to
whether the wound was treated with negative pressure wound therapy (n= 25) or
conventional therapy (n= 25), respectively.
Results: The studied groups were comparable concerning age (P = 0.5), sex (P =
0.395), and body mass index (P = 0.556). No significant differences were detected
among the studied groups concerning diabetes mellitus (P = 0.733), chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.564), previous myocardial infarction (P =
0.370), isolated or combined surgery (P = 0.508), left main stenosis (P = 0.569), or
emergency surgery (P = 0.508). Group A exhibited a significantly shorter hospital
stay (26 ±4 days) than Group B (37 ±6) (P < 0.001). In contrast, no significant
differences were observed among the studied groups concerning ventilation hours
(P = 0.913) or ICU stay (P = 0.524). Group A demonstrated significantly lower
reinfection than Group B (24% vs. 52%, respectively; P = 0.041). No significant
differences were noted concerning reoperation for bleeding (P = 1.0) or mortality
(P = 0.1). Group A demonstrated a significantly lower mean cost than Group B
(110±23 vs. 140 ±37, respectively; P =