RESUMEN

Introduction: The most common chest wall deformities are pectus excavatum and pectus carinatum. Surgical repair of these deformities via minimally invasive technique using pectus bars is commonly preferred by numerous thoracic surgeons. Despite this common choice for treatment, the duration of the bar stay, the bar removal process, the possible complications and ways to prevent them have been debated over the years and still there is no single decision. Aim: To determine the decision making, surgical outcomes and negative factors in the bar removal process. Material and methods: There were 1032 patients underwent bar removal between 2006-2020 and their data was recorded prospectively. We analyzed patients' demographics, family history, Haller index, bar count, body mass index, stabilizer and wire usage, length of hospital stay, time until bar removal, incision side and complications retrospectively. Results: There was no significant correlation between BMI and surgery time (p = 0.748). There was no statistically significant correlation between the age groups and the number of pectus bars removed. The other factors showed no significant difference. The surgery time was found to be significantly longer in those with callus tissue (p = 0.002). Conclusions: These findings suggest that pectus bars can be left in place for a shorter time than the standard 3-year interval without any additional recurrence risk and without compromising quality of life. As a result, patients with persistent pain after pectus repair should be well evaluated for the possibility of life-threatening complications during bar removal.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Despite its less invasive nature, the widespread use of the minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) procedure has been associated with a significant number of serious complications. On the other hand, Pectus bar removal (PBR) is often considered a simple procedure and often scheduled in an outpatient setting. However, several studies report near-fatal complications not only during bar placement, but also during bar removal. The aim of our study was to clarify why a pectus bar should be removed, timing for removal, where PBR should be performed, and overall setup for safe removal. METHODS: A comprehensive review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching for articles published since 1998 in English. "Pectus bar removal AND (near-fatal) complications" were the applied terms. Inclusion criteria were articles reporting on the focus of PBR after MIRPE. Eligible study designs included (retrospective) case study series, case report and reviews. Full-text articles in which the technique in general was described were omitted. RESULTS: Recently published results of an online survey raised awareness about type and number of possible complications during PBR. Furthermore, our comprehensive literature review identified only a few, but serious complications during PBR. CONCLUSIONS: PBR has a high safety profile but in rare cases may be associated with major complications such as life-threatening hemorrhage from various thoracic sources. This risk is higher in patients with a history of complex MIPRE. In an effort to decrease these complications we recommend bilateral opening of surgical incisions, unbending the bar and meticulous mobilization of the bar. To manage these complications if they occur, we recommend removal in a hospital setting with adequate resources and personal including cardiac surgeons. If the postoperative course is uneventful discharge on the same day is reasonable.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The prevalence and type of life-threatening complications related to the minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) and bar removal are unknown and underreported. The purpose of this communication is to make surgeons aware of the risk of these life threatening complications as well as the modifications which have been developed to prevent them. METHODS: Data related to life-threatening complications of Pectus Excavatum (PE) patients was obtained from four sources: 1. A survey of Chest Wall International Group (CWIG) surgeons who specialize in repairing congenital chest wall malformations, 2. Papers and case reports presented at CWIG meetings, 3. Review of medico-legal cases from the USA and 4. A systematic review of the literature related to major complications post MIRPE. RESULTS: From 1998 to 2016, we identified 27 published cases and 32 unreported life-threatening complications including: cardiac perforation, hemothorax, major vessel injury, lung injury, liver injury, gastrointestinal problems, and diaphragm injury. There were seven cases of major complications with bar removal (reported and non-reported) with two lethal outcomes. Mortality data with bar placement surgery: Four published death cases and seven unpublished death cases. The overall incidence of minor & major complications post MIRPE has been reported in the literature to be 2-20%. The true incidence of life-threatening complications and mortality is not known as we do not know the overall number of procedures performed worldwide. However, based on data extrapolated from survey information, the pectus bar manufacturer in the USA, literature reports, and data presented at CWIG meetings as to the number of cases performed we estimated that approximately fifty thousand cases have been performed and that the incidence of life-threatening complications is less than 0.1% with many occurring during the learning curve. Analysis of the cases identified in our survey revealed that previous chest surgery, pectus severity and inexperience were noted to be significant risk factors for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Published reports support the safety and efficacy of MIRPE; however major adverse outcomes are underreported. Although major complications with MIRPE and pectus bar removal surgery are very rare, awareness of the risk and mortality of life-threatening complications is essential to ensure optimal safety. Factors such as operative technique, patient age, pectus severity and asymmetry, previous chest surgery, and the surgeon's experience play a role in the overall incidence of such events. These preventable events can be avoided with proper training, mentoring, and the use of sternal elevation techniques. TYPE OF STUDY: Treatment Study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Surgical correction of pectus excavatum (PE) via a minimally invasive approach involves placement of a steel bar, which is subsequently removed. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the incidence of pneumothorax and the role for chest radiography (CXR) in patients undergoing pectus bar removal. METHODS: A retrospective review of 84 patients who underwent pectus bar removal from 2006 to 2014 was performed. Results of postoperative CXR, repeat imaging, need for chest thoracostomy tube placement, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean Haller index prior to correction was 4.3 ± 0.9. The mean time between PE repair and bar removal was 2.3 ± 0.6 years. Sixty-one patients (72.6 %) had a postoperative CXR. Thirty-one (50.8 %) had no acute findings, 20 (32.8 %) had findings of atelectasis or subcutaneous emphysema, and 10 (16.4 %) had a pneumothorax. One patient (1.6 %) had a second postoperative CXR for a small pneumothorax and rib fractures. There were two complications (2.4 %). No chest tubes were placed for pneumothorax, and 95 % of patients were discharged the day of surgery. CONCLUSION: Postoperative CXR following pectus bar removal is unnecessary given the low incidence of postoperative pneumothorax requiring intervention. Patients can be safely discharged the day of surgery without the need for routine postoperative chest imaging.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pectus bar removal is the final stage of the procedure for minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum. Based on our experience with one of the largest scale data, we would like to address the important issues in pectus bar removal, such as appropriate duration of bar maintenance, techniques for bar removal, and strategies to avoid complications. METHODS: Between September 1999 and August 2015, we operated on 2,553 patients with pectus excavatum and carinatum using pectus bars for a minimally invasive approach. Among them, 1,821 patients (71.3%) underwent pectus bar removal as a final stage of pectus deformity repair, and their data were analyzed retrospectively to identify the outcomes and adverse effects of the pectus bar removal procedure. The mean age of the patients was 9.13 years (range, 16 months to 44 years) and the male to female ratio was 3.55. The study is approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the ethical committee of Seoul St. Mary's Hospital. The IRB has exempted the informed consent from every patient in this study due to this is a retrospective chart review without revealing any patients' personal data. RESULTS: Our technique involved straightening of the bar in a supine position. The overall mean duration of pectus bar maintenance was 2.57 years (range, 4 months to 14 years). The mean duration was 2.02 years (range, 4 months to 7 years) for children under 12 years, 2.99 years (range, 7 months to 9 years) for teenagers aged 12-20 years, and 3.53 years (range, 3 months to 14 years) for adults over 20 years. Forty-eight patients (2.6%) underwent bar removal more than 5 years after bar insertion and 58 patients (3.2%) underwent bar removal earlier than initially planned. The most common adverse reaction after bar removal was wound seroma including infection (43 patients, 2.36%). Recurrence after bar removal occurred in nine patients (0.49%), and seven of these required redo repair (0.38%). CONCLUSIONS: Pectus bar removal is a safe and straightforward procedure with a low rate of complication.