Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery: A combination of 2 distinct infection types, deep incisional surgical-site infection and mediastinitis: Results of a retrospective study

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2025.109255
Christian de Tymowski PhD , Sophie Provenchère MD , Marylou Para MD , Xavier Duval MD , Nathalie Grall MD , Tarek Sahnoun MD , Bernard Iung PhD , Solen Kernéis PhD , Jean-Christophe Lucet PhD , Philippe Montravers PhD
{"title":"Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery: A combination of 2 distinct infection types, deep incisional surgical-site infection and mediastinitis: Results of a retrospective study","authors":"Christian de Tymowski PhD ,&nbsp;Sophie Provenchère MD ,&nbsp;Marylou Para MD ,&nbsp;Xavier Duval MD ,&nbsp;Nathalie Grall MD ,&nbsp;Tarek Sahnoun MD ,&nbsp;Bernard Iung PhD ,&nbsp;Solen Kernéis PhD ,&nbsp;Jean-Christophe Lucet PhD ,&nbsp;Philippe Montravers PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2025.109255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery remains a serious complication associated with a poor prognosis. Deep sternal wound infection is classified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis. This study aims to describe the incidence, perioperative characteristics, and outcomes of deep sternal wound infection on the basis of clinical presentations.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This monocentric retrospective study included all consecutive patients who underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2006 and 2019 in a tertiary teaching hospital. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality, and the main secondary outcome was a landmark analysis of 90-day mortality, excluding patients who died within the first 28 days.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among the 14,850 patients included in this study, deep sternal wound infection occurred in 542 (3.6%) patients: 390 (72%) presented with deep incisional surgical site-infection and 152 (28%) presented mediastinitis. Patients with deep sternal wound infection had a lower 90-day survival than patients without deep sternal wound infection; in particular, patients with mediastinitis had the lowest survival rate compared to deep incisional surgical site-infection– and deep sternal wound infection –free patients (82% vs 94% vs 95%, respectively; both comparisons <em>P</em> &lt; .001), and mediastinitis was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality. No difference in 90-day survival was observed between patients without deep sternal wound infection and patients with deep incisional surgical site-infection (<em>P</em> = .378). However, in the landmark analysis, both deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis were associated with lower survival compared with patients without deep sternal wound infection and were independent risk factors for mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis exhibited distinct incidences, bacterial characteristics, and prognoses, with mediastinitis being associated with the poorest prognosis. However, when the competing risk of death was considered, deep incisional surgical-site infection diSSI also emerged as an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 109255"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039606025001072","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Deep sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery remains a serious complication associated with a poor prognosis. Deep sternal wound infection is classified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis. This study aims to describe the incidence, perioperative characteristics, and outcomes of deep sternal wound infection on the basis of clinical presentations.

Methods

This monocentric retrospective study included all consecutive patients who underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2006 and 2019 in a tertiary teaching hospital. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality, and the main secondary outcome was a landmark analysis of 90-day mortality, excluding patients who died within the first 28 days.

Results

Among the 14,850 patients included in this study, deep sternal wound infection occurred in 542 (3.6%) patients: 390 (72%) presented with deep incisional surgical site-infection and 152 (28%) presented mediastinitis. Patients with deep sternal wound infection had a lower 90-day survival than patients without deep sternal wound infection; in particular, patients with mediastinitis had the lowest survival rate compared to deep incisional surgical site-infection– and deep sternal wound infection –free patients (82% vs 94% vs 95%, respectively; both comparisons P < .001), and mediastinitis was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality. No difference in 90-day survival was observed between patients without deep sternal wound infection and patients with deep incisional surgical site-infection (P = .378). However, in the landmark analysis, both deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis were associated with lower survival compared with patients without deep sternal wound infection and were independent risk factors for mortality.

Conclusion

Deep incisional surgical site-infection and mediastinitis exhibited distinct incidences, bacterial characteristics, and prognoses, with mediastinitis being associated with the poorest prognosis. However, when the competing risk of death was considered, deep incisional surgical-site infection diSSI also emerged as an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心脏手术后胸骨深部伤口感染:两种不同感染类型的组合,深切口手术部位感染和纵隔炎:一项回顾性研究的结果
心脏手术后深胸骨伤口感染仍然是预后不良的严重并发症。深胸骨伤口感染被疾病控制和预防中心分类为深切口手术部位感染和纵隔炎。本研究旨在根据临床表现描述胸骨深部伤口感染的发生率、围手术期特征和预后。方法本研究为单中心回顾性研究,纳入2006年至2019年在某三级教学医院连续行心脏手术合并体外循环的患者。主要结局是90天死亡率,主要次要结局是90天死亡率的里程碑式分析,不包括前28天死亡的患者。结果本组14850例患者中,542例(3.6%)发生胸骨深切口感染,390例(72%)出现手术部位深切口感染,152例(28%)出现纵隔炎。胸骨深创面感染患者的90天生存率低于无胸骨深创面感染患者;特别是,与深切口手术部位感染和无深胸骨伤口感染的患者相比,纵隔炎患者的生存率最低(分别为82%、94%和95%);两个比较P <;.001),纵隔炎是90天死亡率的独立危险因素。无深胸骨伤口感染患者与深切口手术部位感染患者的90天生存率无差异(P = .378)。然而,在里程碑式的分析中,与没有深胸骨伤口感染的患者相比,深切口手术部位感染和纵隔炎都与较低的生存率相关,并且是死亡率的独立危险因素。结论深切口手术部位感染与纵隔炎发生率、细菌特征及预后均有显著差异,其中纵隔炎预后最差。然而,当考虑竞争死亡风险时,深切口手术部位感染diSSI也成为90天死亡率的独立危险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
期刊最新文献
ERGO (ERGonomics in the Operating room) study: A cross-sectional international online survey. Contents Acknowledgments of Peer Reviewers Recorder's notes from the 82nd annual meeting of the Central surgical association held in Indianapolis, in on June 5th to 7th, 2025 Cover 1(with editorial board)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1