Background: Various treatments, such as negative pressure wound therapy or
traditional therapy, can be employed to manage postoperative mediastinitis. The
superiority of one approach over the other is still a subject of discussion. Our
purpose was to compare the results of negative pressure wound therapy and
conventional therapy for treating postcoronary artery bypass graft mediastinitis.
Methods: This study included 50 individuals with mediastinitis after coronary
artery bypass grafting. Patients were divided into Groups A and B according to
whether the wound was treated with negative pressure wound therapy (n= 25) or
conventional therapy (n= 25), respectively.
Results: The studied groups were comparable concerning age (P = 0.5), sex (P =
0.395), and body mass index (P = 0.556). No significant differences were detected
among the studied groups concerning diabetes mellitus (P = 0.733), chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.564), previous myocardial infarction (P =
0.370), isolated or combined surgery (P = 0.508), left main stenosis (P = 0.569), or
emergency surgery (P = 0.508). Group A exhibited a significantly shorter hospital
stay (26 ±4 days) than Group B (37 ±6) (P < 0.001). In contrast, no significant
differences were observed among the studied groups concerning ventilation hours
(P = 0.913) or ICU stay (P = 0.524). Group A demonstrated significantly lower
reinfection than Group B (24% vs. 52%, respectively; P = 0.041). No significant
differences were noted concerning reoperation for bleeding (P = 1.0) or mortality
(P = 0.1). Group A demonstrated a significantly lower mean cost than Group B
(110±23 vs. 140 ±37, respectively; P = |
