OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficiency of 2 different sternal wiring techniques in preventing deep sternal wound infection or sternal instability. METHODS:Seven hundred patients were randomized to 2 different groups according to chest-closure techniques. Three hundred fifty patients who underwent aperisternal double crisscross wire closure were included in group X, whereas 350 patients who underwent astandard transsternal closure were included in group T. After sternal closure, the technique for wound suturing was the same for both groups, namely triple-layer sutures up to the intracutaneous skin. All data were prospectively collected and entered in our institute database. RESULTS: The 2 groups of patients were comparable for sex, age, preoperative risk factors, and operative procedures. The overall mortality rate was 4.3% in group X and 4.6% in group T. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were comparable between the 2 groups, unlike for sternal wound complications. None of the patients included in group X had superficial or deep wound complications, whereas in group T 7 (2%) patients presented with a superficial sternal wound infection, 6 (1.7%) presented with a deep chest wound infection with sternal instability requiring re-exploration (P <.05), and 3 presented with a sternal instability caused by sternum disruption without infection. Among patients with deep wound infection and sternal instability, 1 patient died, resulting in a mortality rate of 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The peristernal double crisscross wiring technique achieved a greater sternal stability, resulting in a lower incidence of wound infection in association with triple-layer closure of suprasternal tissues.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficiency of 2 different sternal wiring techniques in preventing deep sternal wound infection or sternal instability. METHODS: Seven hundred patients were randomized to 2 different groups according to chest-closure techniques. Three hundred fifty patients who underwent a peristernal double crisscross wire closure were included in group X, whereas 350 patients who underwent a standard transsternal closure were included in group T. After sternal closure, the technique for wound suturing was the same for both groups, namely triple-layer sutures up to the intracutaneous skin. All data were prospectively collected and entered in our institute database. RESULTS: The 2 groups of patients were comparable for sex, age, preoperative risk factors, and operative procedures. The overall mortality rate was 4.3% in group X and 4.6% in group T. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were comparable between the 2 groups, unlike for sternal wound complications. None of the patients included in group X had superficial or deep wound complications, whereas in group T 7 (2%) patients presented with a superficial sternal wound infection, 6 (1.7%) presented with a deep chest wound infection with sternal instability requiring re-exploration (P <.05), and 3 presented with a sternal instability caused by sternum disruption without infection. Among patients with deep wound infection and sternal instability, 1 patient died, resulting in a mortality rate of 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The peristernal double crisscross wiring technique achieved a greater sternal stability, resulting in a lower incidence of wound infection in association with triple-layer closure of suprasternal tissues.