Given these potential risks, many techniques have been described to increase the safety of sternal re-entry. Most of the published reports, however, share a common view that an oscillating saw is preferable to ensure a safe procedure.[1-3] The current paradigm gaining widespread acceptance among cardiac surgeons demonizes the use of a reciprocating saw in these cases without producing much supporting evidence. Against this notion, some surgeons have been trained in the use of the reciprocating saw for this type of surgery and continue to use them. The purpose of this article is to describe the technique used to perform a safe resternotomy using a reciprocating saw.
SURGICAL TECHNIQUE
Preoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography
(CT) is only offered to patients who have previously
used prosthetic patches and/or conduits involving the
aorta or the right ventricular outflow tract as well as
those with patent coronary bypass grafts.
Intraoperatively, following skin incision, the sternal wires are cut and removed, and blunt dissection is performed superiorly around the sternal notch with the finger. The linea alba is then divided for a few centimeters inferiorly from the xiphoid process while maintaining upward traction, and 5 to 6 cm of the retrosternal space is cleared of adhesions mostly via blunt dissection along the posterior sternal table. Prior to sawing the sternum, ventilation is stopped to allow the pleura and adjacent soft tissues to fall away from the sternum. The sternum is then divided along the previously defined midline with a reciprocating saw (Aesculap, a division of the B. Braun Melsungen AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) from the xiphoid upwards. At this point, two technical details are crucial in order to avoid injury to the underlying structures. The first is to ensure that the saw is snugly lifted against the sternum and slightly tilted backwards. This allows the protective foot piece of the saw to further develop a safe plane retrosternally ahead of the sternal cutting and prevents the saw from cutting freely into any underlying soft tissue structures. Secondly, the saw is to be advanced in a to-and-fro motion rather than a continuous one to allow the protective foot piece of the saw to disengage from substernal adhesions, thus creating a safe pathway for sawing. Following sternal division, hemostasis is achieved along the posterior aspect of the sternum, and further dissection is carried out in the normal fashion.
The use of a reciprocating saw for sternal re-entry is currently being adopted by an increasingly smaller number of surgeons, as evidenced by previously published questionnaires. One questionnaire circulated by Dobell and Jain was probably the first evidence of a paradigm embracing the oscillating saw for this surgical procedure[1] They discovered that the majority of responders preferred the use of an oscillating saw. Only one out of the 131 surgeons questioned indicated a preference for the reciprocating saw. Another questionnaire showed that a minority of surgeons (153 out of 1,116) would use the reciprocating saw for a resternotomy, but this survey provided no further portrayal of the exact techniques that should be used.[2] The reported higher incidence of injury on sternal re-entry among these surgeons is obviously subject to a much potential bias. Furthermore, these questionnaires notoriously neglected other more important predictors of injury at the time of resternotomies, such as multiple previous resternotomies, a patent internal mammary artery graft, or a history of mediastinal radiotherapy.[3,4]
More recently, Roselli et al.[3] r eviewed 1 ,847 resternotomy cases and recommended the routine use of the oscillating saw. However, another large retrospective series by Park et al.[4] examined 2,555 cases of sternal re-entry, but they did not specify the type of saw being used due to different preferences among the surgeons.
In cases where the aorta, right ventricle, or patent bypass grafts have become firmly adherent to the back of the sternum, an injury would likely occur whether an oscillating or a reciprocating saw was used, even with adequate experience and attention to technical details. The technical tips permitting for the safe use of reciprocating saws in resternotomies, as detailed in our operative techniques, have been previously reiterated in an published article by Diethrich[6] which narrated how the reciprocating saw was originally developed to avoid injury to the dura mater during a craniotomy.
In conclusion, the reciprocating saw can safely be used for resternotomies. Rather than advocating a particular type of saw, attention should be directed to the identification of other more important predictors of injury and the institution of preemptive protective measures.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest with
respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the
research and/or authorship of this article.
1) Dobell AR, Jain AK. Catastrophic hemorrhage during redo
sternotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 1984;37:273-8.
2) Follis FM, Pett SB Jr, Miller KB, Wong RS, Temes RT,
Wernly JA. Catastrophic hemorrhage on sternal reentry: still
a dreaded complication? Ann Thorac Surg 1999;68:2215-9.
3) Roselli EE, Pettersson GB, Blackstone EH, Brizzio ME,
Houghtaling PL, Hauck R, et al. Adverse events during
reoperative cardiac surgery: frequency, characterization, and
rescue. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:316-23, 323.e1-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.08.060.
4) Park CB, Suri RM, Burkhart HM, Greason KL, Dearani
JA, Schaff HV, et al. Identifying patients at particular risk
of injury during repeat sternotomy: analysis of 2555 cardiac
reoperations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;140:1028-35.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.07.086.