Rigid Plate Fixation for Closure of Emergent Sternotomies for Trauma

No studies to date have evaluated the use of rigid plate fixation for emergent sternotomy in trauma patients. We evaluated our use of rigid plate fixation vs wire cerclage in patients requiring emergent sternotomy. We hypothesized there would be no difference in complications related to sternal closure between the two groups.

We performed a retrospective cohort study to include all patients who underwent emergent sternotomy from 1/1/2018 to 1/31/2021 and survived to have their sternum closed. Outcomes in patients closed with wire cerclage group (WC) were compared to patients who underwent rigid plate fixation (RPF).

Twenty-two patients underwent emergent sternotomy. There were 11 patients in each group. There was no significant difference in admission demographics, ISS, or admission characteristics between the two groups. Complication rates related to closure (wound infection and hardware removal) were not significantly different (WC 27% vs RPF 9%, P = .58). Neither hospital length of stay (WC: 29 days vs RPF: 13 days, P = .13), ICU length of stay (WC: 6 days vs RPF: 7 days, P = .62), nor the number of ventilator days (WC: 3 days vs RPF: 1 day, P .11) were statistically different. All patients survived to discharge.

This is the first study comparing RPF and WC for sternotomy closure in the setting of trauma. We found no difference in the rate of wound related complications. This study demonstrates the feasibility of rigid plate fixation for trauma sternotomy closure and lays the foundation for future prospective studies.