A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery

Abstract Surgical site infection (SSI) is among the most common complication of major heart surgery patients with incidences ranging from 0.5 to 16.5%. Our aim was to compare the incidence, etiology and prognosis of surgical wound infection in three groups of patients with three different type of wo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: María Jesús Pérez-Granda, Gregorio Cuerpo, José María Barrio, Maricela Valerio, Patricia Muñoz, Ángel González Pinto, Dominique Encarnación Valencia, Félix Sánchez Vicario, Emilio Bouza, Cardiovascular Infection Study Group
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2025-06-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-02533-7
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850137630803492864
author María Jesús Pérez-Granda
Gregorio Cuerpo
José María Barrio
Maricela Valerio
Patricia Muñoz
Ángel González Pinto
Dominique Encarnación Valencia
Félix Sánchez Vicario
Emilio Bouza
Cardiovascular Infection Study Group
author_facet María Jesús Pérez-Granda
Gregorio Cuerpo
José María Barrio
Maricela Valerio
Patricia Muñoz
Ángel González Pinto
Dominique Encarnación Valencia
Félix Sánchez Vicario
Emilio Bouza
Cardiovascular Infection Study Group
author_sort María Jesús Pérez-Granda
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Surgical site infection (SSI) is among the most common complication of major heart surgery patients with incidences ranging from 0.5 to 16.5%. Our aim was to compare the incidence, etiology and prognosis of surgical wound infection in three groups of patients with three different type of wound dressing used in a large cohort of patients undergoing cardiac surgery requiring median sternotomy (MHS). This was a randomized, prospective clinical study conducted in 900 adults undergoing MHS at our center from October 10, 2019 to February 22, 2022. Before surgical closure, patients were randomized to 3 different wound dressing groups (300 patients per group): A) conventional gauze (Mepore®), B) Absorbent: polyurethane foam (Mepilex®), or C) Vacuum-negative-pressure therapy (NPWT) wound dressing (PICO®, Smith & Nephew S.A.). Overall, 900 patients were randomized as follows: 300 patients in each group received conventional, absorbent or vacuum wound dressing respectively. Rates of SSI in groups A, B and C were respectively 2.3%, 3% and 3% for superficial SSI (sSSI) (p = 0.848) and 2%, 2% and 0.7% for postsurgical mediastinitis (PSM) (p = 0.313). Mortality in the whole group was 4.4% there being no significant differences between the three groups (4.7%, 5.7% and 3% respectively; p = 0.277). The NPWT system was better at preventing PSM than the other dressings only in the subgroup of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with mammary artery grafts. We have not been able to demonstrate significant differences in the incidence of SSI in the whole series with any of the different dressings. The newer, more expensive, NPWT dressing were more effective only at preventing Post-Surgical Mediastinitis in patients undergoing CABG with internal mammary artery grafts. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03905213
format Article
id doaj-art-a6bf567e14bb46598725da9ee1e6189c
institution OA Journals
issn 2045-2322
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Scientific Reports
spelling doaj-art-a6bf567e14bb46598725da9ee1e6189c2025-08-20T02:30:46ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-06-0115111110.1038/s41598-025-02533-7A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgeryMaría Jesús Pérez-Granda0Gregorio Cuerpo1José María Barrio2Maricela Valerio3Patricia Muñoz4Ángel González Pinto5Dominique Encarnación Valencia6Félix Sánchez Vicario7Emilio Bouza8Cardiovascular Infection Study GroupClinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónCIBER de Enfermedades Respiratorias-CIBERES (CB06/06/0058)Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónClinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónCIBER de Enfermedades Respiratorias-CIBERES (CB06/06/0058)Abstract Surgical site infection (SSI) is among the most common complication of major heart surgery patients with incidences ranging from 0.5 to 16.5%. Our aim was to compare the incidence, etiology and prognosis of surgical wound infection in three groups of patients with three different type of wound dressing used in a large cohort of patients undergoing cardiac surgery requiring median sternotomy (MHS). This was a randomized, prospective clinical study conducted in 900 adults undergoing MHS at our center from October 10, 2019 to February 22, 2022. Before surgical closure, patients were randomized to 3 different wound dressing groups (300 patients per group): A) conventional gauze (Mepore®), B) Absorbent: polyurethane foam (Mepilex®), or C) Vacuum-negative-pressure therapy (NPWT) wound dressing (PICO®, Smith & Nephew S.A.). Overall, 900 patients were randomized as follows: 300 patients in each group received conventional, absorbent or vacuum wound dressing respectively. Rates of SSI in groups A, B and C were respectively 2.3%, 3% and 3% for superficial SSI (sSSI) (p = 0.848) and 2%, 2% and 0.7% for postsurgical mediastinitis (PSM) (p = 0.313). Mortality in the whole group was 4.4% there being no significant differences between the three groups (4.7%, 5.7% and 3% respectively; p = 0.277). The NPWT system was better at preventing PSM than the other dressings only in the subgroup of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with mammary artery grafts. We have not been able to demonstrate significant differences in the incidence of SSI in the whole series with any of the different dressings. The newer, more expensive, NPWT dressing were more effective only at preventing Post-Surgical Mediastinitis in patients undergoing CABG with internal mammary artery grafts. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03905213https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-02533-7Surgical wound infectionMajor heart surgeryPrevention
spellingShingle María Jesús Pérez-Granda
Gregorio Cuerpo
José María Barrio
Maricela Valerio
Patricia Muñoz
Ángel González Pinto
Dominique Encarnación Valencia
Félix Sánchez Vicario
Emilio Bouza
Cardiovascular Infection Study Group
A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
Scientific Reports
Surgical wound infection
Major heart surgery
Prevention
title A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
title_full A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
title_fullStr A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
title_full_unstemmed A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
title_short A prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
title_sort prospective randomized study that compares three different dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections following major heart surgery
topic Surgical wound infection
Major heart surgery
Prevention
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-02533-7
work_keys_str_mv AT mariajesusperezgranda aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT gregoriocuerpo aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT josemariabarrio aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT maricelavalerio aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT patriciamunoz aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT angelgonzalezpinto aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT dominiqueencarnacionvalencia aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT felixsanchezvicario aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT emiliobouza aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT cardiovascularinfectionstudygroup aprospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT mariajesusperezgranda prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT gregoriocuerpo prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT josemariabarrio prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT maricelavalerio prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT patriciamunoz prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT angelgonzalezpinto prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT dominiqueencarnacionvalencia prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT felixsanchezvicario prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT emiliobouza prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery
AT cardiovascularinfectionstudygroup prospectiverandomizedstudythatcomparesthreedifferentdressingsforthepreventionofsurgicalsiteinfectionsfollowingmajorheartsurgery