ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
Sternotomy Wound Closure: Equivalent Results with Less Surgery.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Using Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy Specialty Dressings over Incisions following Sternal Dehiscence Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMediastinitis after a median sternotomy can be life-threatening. The advent of pedicle flap-based treatment has resulted in an improvement in both morbidity and mortality. However, significant morbidities can still occur following the use of flaps for sternal closure, particularly in patients with comorbidities. To minimize an extensive surgical dissection, we modified our approach to reconstruction using a modified subpectoral approach, leaving the overlying skin attached. This technique focuses primarily on controlling wound tension rather than on maximal muscle coverage. This study is a retrospective review of 58 consecutive patients treated with this approach, by a single surgeon.
methodsFifty-eight consecutive patients treated between 2008 and 2019 were included. All patients received the same procedure regardless of the degree of illness, the extent of tissue loss, and the size of sternal defect. Treatment included thorough debridement, with total sternectomy (if required); limited dissection of the pectoralis major muscle off the chest wall to the level of the pectoralis minor without skin and subcutaneous undermining; no release of the insertion of the pectoralis or use of the rectus abdominis; and midline closure over drains connected to wall suction to obliterate dead space.
resultsReoperations were required in 7 patients (12%). Of these, only 4 (6.9%) were related to continued sternal osteomyelitis. The other reoperations were for hematoma evacuation, breast fat necrosis, and skin necrosis. There were no operative mortalities.
conclusionChest closure using minimal dissection and tension release is safe, efficient, and associated with a complication rate equivalent to more extensive procedures reported in the literature despite significant comorbidities.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.