Authors
Cherkasov M.F.1, Sidorov R.V.2, Galashokyan K.M.1, Cherkasov D.M.1, Bazilevich A.V.1
1 Rostov State Medical University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia
2 State Budgetary Institution of the Rostov Region “Emergency Hospital” in Rostov-on-Don, Rostov-on-Don, Russia
Abstract
Rationale. Minimally invasive coronary surgery (MICS) combines advantages of both traditional bypass surgery and endovascular procedures. As minimally invasive surgeries become more common, postoperative wound complications are likely to rise. Objective: improve the outcomes of wound complications after minimally invasive coronary surgery. Methods: the study was conducted in cardiosurgical and surgical departments. Study included 5 patients with surgical site infection after MIDCAB. There were 3 (60%) women and 2 (40%) men among the participants. All clinical cases were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, and 3 (60%) cases had grade II obesity, while 2 (40%) cases had grade I obesity. Results: average time for wound complications was 6.6 days. Surgical treatments were performed an average of 2.2 times, and vacuum therapy began after 13.8 days, lasting 9.6 days in an intermediate mode. On average, 5 dressings were performed. Antibacterial therapy lasted 11.4 days. Secondary sutures were applied approximately 10 days later. In a single case, a fistula was formed, but there were no recurrences. Conclusion: clinical experience shows that vacuum therapy accelerates the transition of the wound to healing, reducing the time required for wound closure and restoring the patients’ ability to work after MICS.
Keywords: coronary artery bypass, wound healing, surgical wound infection, negative-pressure wound therapy.
References
1. Bokeriya LA, Gudkova RG. Cardiovascular surgery. Diseases and congenital abnormalities of the circulatory system. M.: NCSSH im. A.N. Bakuleva RAMN; 2013: 162. (In Russ.)
2. Charyshkin AL, Gur’yanov AA. Application of a modified vacuum therapy method in the treatment of infected post-sternotomy wounds. Byulleten’ sibirskoj mediciny. 2020; 19(3): 89-94. (In Russ.) doi: 10.20538/1682-0363-2020-3-89-94.
3. Bokeriya LA, Abdulgasanov RA, Shogenov MA, Abdulgasanova MR. Sternomediastinitis: modern methods of diagnosis and treatment. Thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. Grudnaya i serdechno-sosudistaya hirurgiya. 2021; 63(1): 7-19. (In Russ.) doi: 10.24022/ 0236-2791-2021-63-1-7-19.
4. Korymasov E.A. Poststernotomy mediastinitis: a monograph. – M.: Pero, 2021. Р.152. (In Russ.)
5. Sidorov RV, Bazilevich AV, Katkov AA, et al. Low invasive coronary surgery: overview of coronary heart disease modern surgical treatment techniques. Vestnik Nacional’nogo mediko-hirurgicheskogo centra im. N.I. Pirogova. 2021. 16(3): 84-88. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25881/20728255_2021_16_3_84.
6. Sharaf M, Zittermann A, Sunavsky J, et al. Early and late outcomes after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass vs. full sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11: 1298466. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1298466.
7. Monsefi N, Alaj E, Sirat S, Bakhtiary F. Postoperative results of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass procedure in 234 patients. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023; 9: 1051105. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1051105.
8. Cherkasov MF, Galashokyan KM, Starcev YuM, et al. Vacuum therapy in the complex treatment of postoperative sternomediastinitis. Infekcii v hirurgii. 2023; 21(2): 46-53. (In Russ.)
9. Potapov VA, Koxan EP, Asanov ON, Musailov VA. The use of vacuum therapy and bacteriophages in the complex treatment of deep sternal infection. Vestnik Nacional’nogo mediko-hirurgicheskogo centra im. N.I. Pirogova. 2021; 16(2): 66-71. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25881/20728255_2021_16_2_66.
10. Vdovin AM, Toneev EA, Pikin OV, Shagdaleev RF, Martynov AA. Prediction of wound infection complications after elective thoracotomy. Grudnaya i serdechno-sosudistaya hirurgiya. 2024; 66(6): 837-847. (In Russ.) doi: 10.24022/ 0236-2791-2024-66-6-837-847.
