Comparative Analysis of Sternal Closure Methods Following CABG Surgery: A Study from the Tehran Heart Center
Research Article Siyamak Jalal Hosseini1*, Soheil Mansourian2, Mohammadreza Shoghli3, Hermon Eyob Fesseha4 , Rajesh Jain5 Submitted: 14 June 2024;Accepted: 10 July 2024; Published: 27 June 2024 1. Assistant Professor, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; 2. Professor Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; 3. Doctoral Researchers, Department of Population Health, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; 4. Hermon Eyob Fesseha: MD, cardiology resident, Peijas Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa (HUS), University of Eastern Finland, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; 5. Consultant Diabetes, Jain hospital & research Centre, Kanpur, India. Corresponding Author:1* Assistant Professor, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. email [email protected] Abstract: This study examined 204 patients undergoing CABG surgery at Tehran Heart Center between Ordibehesht 1402 and Ordibehesht 1403 for postoperative complications. Objective: Investigation and Comparison of Complications in Single-Wire and Double-Wire Sternal Closure Methods Following Open Heart Surgery in Patients Referred to Tehran Heart Center from May 2023 to May 2024 Methods: Patients were divided into two groups of 102 each, with Group 1 undergoing sternal closure using a single-wire method and Group 2 using a double-wire method. Results: All patients were discharged after surgery and followed up for one year. The age range was 44 to 75, with 21 patients aged 45-55 (10%), 133 patients aged 55-65 (65%), and 50 patients aged 65-75 (24%). Both groups had similar age distributions. Of the total patients, 78 were female (38.2%) and 126 were male (61.8%), indicating a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease in males. In Group 1, 37% were women and 63% were men; in Group 2, 39% were women and 61% were men. We compared four parameters between the two groups: infection, pain, stability, and tissue reaction. In Group 1, 8 patients (7%) developed superficial skin infections, with a readmission rate of 1%. In Group 2, 6 patients (5%) developed superficial infections, with one readmission. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in infection rates between the two methods. Regarding pain after surgery, 17 patients in Group 1 (10%) reported postoperative pain, which decreased to 2% after three months and disappeared completely after one year. In Group 2, 24 patients experienced pain, which also resolved within a year. However, statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in pain rates between the two groups, indicating more pain in patients with double-wire closure. Conclusion: The two groups had no significant differences in stability and tissue reaction. Our study suggests that the single-wire closure method may lead to less postoperative pain in stable patients without risk factors, contributing to earlier recovery and improved quality of life. Methodology and Procedure: We conducted a comparative study on sternal closure methods following CABG surgery among patients treated at the Tehran Heart Center between 2022 and 2024. We divided all patients into two groups, each consisting of 102 individuals. Gender distribution and age demographics were carefully balanced between the groups to prevent selection bias. Patients with poorly controlled metabolic diseases were excluded from the study. Group 1 underwent sternal closure using a single-wire method, while Group 2 underwent closure with double wires. After performing surgeries on all 204 patients, they were discharged from the hospital and followed up for one-year post-surgery. The age range of the patients was from 44 to 75, with 21 patients aged 45-55 (10%), 133 patients aged 55-65 (65%), and 50 patients aged 65-75 (24%). Both groups had similar age distributions. Of the total, 78 patients were women, and 126 were men, consistent with the documented higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease in men. Group 1 comprised 37% women and 63% men, while Group 2 had 39% women and 61% men. We analyzed four parameters across both groups: infection, pain, stability, and tissue reaction. In Group 1, 8 patients (7%) developed infections from sternotomy, with one patient requiring readmission. Similarly, in Group 2, 6 patients developed infections, with one readmission. Statistical analysis using SPSS showed no significant difference in infection rates between the two closure methods. Both groups showed similar stability and tissue reaction outcomes, with no dehiscence or adverse tissue reactions observed. A sternal dehiscence is a catastrophic event in cardiac surgery. Both sternal closure methods yielded comparable outcomes in stable patients without risk factors. However, the double-wire method required a longer operation than the single-wire method. In the assessment of post-CABG pain, remarkable findings emerged. In Group 1, 44 patients experienced pain, with 32 having mild pain, 10 moderate pain, and 2 severe pain. In contrast, Group 2 had 55 patients reporting pain, with 40 experiencing mild pain, 11 moderate pain, and 4 severe pain. After three months, only one patient in Group 1 continued to experience pain, which resolved by the sixth month. Conversely, all patients in Group 2 were pain-free after six months. Statistical analysis revealed that 43% of patients in Group 1 experienced pain compared to 53% in Group 2. Based on these findings, we concluded that avoiding double-wire sternal closure in stable patients (those without poorly controlled metabolic conditions, risk factors, sepsis, or osteopenia) could enhance the quality of life and rehabilitation outcomes following CABG surgery. Introduction Currently, most heart surgeries are performed via midline sternotomy. This type of incision was first proposed in 1857 and gained popularity in 1957. Generally, sternotomy complications are rare; however, they are usually serious when they occur. The most common complications include infection and mediastinitis [1]. Sternotomy is a surgical procedure in which surgeons make a vertical incision along the midline of the chest. This approach replaced the previous bilateral thoracotomy method. Sternotomy became popular mainly because it is less painful than previous models, and it quickly became apparent that it could lead to problems such as infection or wound dehiscence [1]. Sternotomy is a surgical procedure in which the surgeon creates an internal vertical incision along the midline of the chest. This allows access to the entire chest area, including the heart and lungs [2]. This approach has several advantages, including less pain, better access to pleural cavities, and greater protection of chest muscles [7]. Overall, sternotomy is a relatively