Article Abstract

Comparison between noninvasive and conventional skin closure methods in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting using bilateral internal thoracic artery

Authors: Heemoon Lee, Sang Yoon Yeom, Hee Jung Kim, Jae Suk Yoo, Dong Jin Kim, Kwang Ree Cho


Background: Sternal wound complications could increase the hospital cost while decreasing the satisfaction of surgery. Furthermore, it can potentially also lead to life-threatening mediastinitis especially after coronary artery bypass grafting using bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA). Skill levels of suture technique vary among surgeons and may contribute to an increased wound complication rate. Thus, standardization of surgical wound closure could potentially decrease the surgeon factor. The aim of the study is to compare the wound complication rate between non-invasive surgical skin closure devices (zip surgical skin closure device, Zipline Medical, Campbell, CA, USA) and conventional suture closure.
Methods: Three hundred seventy-nine patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) using BITAs at our institution between 2016 and 2018 were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups; the Zipline group (zip-group, N=100), and conventional group (con-group, N=279). Following propensity score matching, 95 con-group patients were matched to 169 zip-group patients.
Results: The average age and history of cancer were significantly higher in the zip-group (P=0.021 and P=0.023, respectively). However, after propensity score matching, no differences were observed in the demographic data between the groups. In total patients (unmatched), although there was no significant difference in the incidence of deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) between the two groups (zip vs. con, 0% vs. 1.1%, P=0.569), the incidence of post-operative superficial sternal wound infection (SSWI) or dehiscence was significantly higher in the con-group than in the zip-group (1.0% vs. 7.9%, P=0.013). The results were consistent in the matched patients. (DSWI: 0% vs. 0.6%, P>0.999; SSWI or dehiscence: 1.1% vs. 7.1%, P=0.036). Multivariable analysis revealed use of the zip surgical skin closure device showed a preventive effect against wound complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.128, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.017–0.976, P=0.029].
Conclusions: Zip surgical skin closure devices could decrease superficial wound complication rates compared to conventional suture techniques in OPCAB using BITAs.