4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Management of intractable sternal wound infections with topical negative pressure dressing

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 218-222

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2005.200416.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Sternal osteomyelitis after cardiac surgery is a life-threatening complication. The potential spread of infection into the mediastinum, involving the prosthetic valve, grafts, and suture lines, makes this an extremely serious complication confronting both cardiac and plastic surgeons. Aim: Topical negative pressure (TNP) dressing has been proven to be effective for wound healing. We want to take advantages of this equipment to improve the results of intractable sternal wound infection. The results are discussed. Methods: From December 1996 to July 2002, 25 patients with sternal wound infections were treated at Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital. Nine patients suffering intractable sternal osteomyelitis were managed with debridement and TNP dressings. These patients received 1-3 debridements (an average of 2.2 debridements), and the average TNP dressing treatment period was 20.2 days (ranging from 3 to 43 days). After management, the infections were controlled and healthy vascularized wounds were achieved. Then, flap reconstruction could be performed for complete wound closure. Seven of the nine patients survived, and there was no recurrence of sternal osteomyelitis during follow-up period (ranging from 5 to 70 months). Conclusion: The advantages of applying TNP dressings in cases of intractable sternal wound infections include (1) protecting the underlying mediasternal structure from infection, (2) permitting delayed sternal closure to avoid cardiac compression induced compromised cardiopulmonary function, (3) possibility of repeated wound inspection and bedside debridement, (4) cost-effectiveness of wound care, and (5) providing an option to promote sternal wound secondary healing for patients in poor physical condition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据