Pectus Bar Research Articles

Clinical impact of multiple pectus bars on surgical outcomes following pectus excavatum repair.

The Nuss procedure, a minimally invasive surgery for pectus excavatum, has undergone various improvements. However, the impact of using multiple bars on thoracic shape changes and surgical outcomes remains unclear. We retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent the Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum between August 2014 and September 2021. We divided the patients into 2 groups based on the number of bars placed and identified differences in surgical outcomes and morphological characteristics. A total of 225 patients were evaluated, of whom 132 were classified into the ≤2 bar group (using 1 or 2 bars) and 93 into the ≥3 bar group (using 3 or more bars). There was no difference in the preoperative Haller index [median (interquartile range), 4.59 (3.67-6.16) vs 4.67 (4.12-6.14), P = 0.227], and asymmetric excavatum was more frequently observed in the ≥3 bar group (81% vs 51%, P < 0.001). The preoperative sternal torsion angle was larger in the ≥3 bar group, but no difference was found between the 2 groups postoperatively. The incidence of postoperative complications (≥grade 3) was comparable between groups (10% vs 17%, P = 0.105); however, postoperative pleurisy was more frequently observed in the ≥3 bar group (12% vs 4%, P = 0.021). In univariable and multivariable analyses, ≥3 bar placement was the only risk factor for postoperative pleurisy. The placement of multiple bars (≥3 bars) is useful for the correction of asymmetric pectus excavatum, but attention should be paid to the potential risk of postoperative pleurisy.

Biocompatible Cable Ties Are an Alternative to Metal Stabilizers for Bar Securement During Minimally Invasive Pectus Excavatum Repair.

Background: Bar stabilization during minimally invasive pectus excavatum repair (MIRPE) is critical to avoid dislodgement. Multiple techniques are described including stabilizers, wires, and sutures. This retrospective study compared bar movement and outcomes between existing techniques and ZipFix™, a biocompatible cable tie. Methods: Patients ≤20 years of age who underwent MIRPE with ZipFix between January 2021 and September 2022 were compared with historical controls who underwent repair by same surgeons between January 2018 and December 2020 using stabilizers or polydioxanone suture (PDS). Demographics, clinical details, and outcomes were compared using Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests. Results: Of the 116 patients who underwent repair, 45 had bars secured with ZipFix (39%) and 71 (61%) were historical controls (35 stabilizer, 36 PDS). Median (interquartile range) age was 15 (14-16) years and Haller index was 3.9 (3.6-4.5). Nine (8%) patients required two bars. Haller index and use of second bar were comparable between stabilization techniques (P > .05). In total, 49 patients (40%) reported any pain at 1 month and this was similar between stabilization techniques (P = .45). Median bar movement was greater for bars secured with PDS than with ZipFix or stabilizers at 1 month (5.5 versus 2.3 versus 3.3°, P = .010) and last follow-up (6.5 versus 2.1 versus 3.6°, P < .001). One patient whose bar was secured with PDS required revision for dislodgement. Conclusion: Pectus bar stabilization with ZipFix is a safe alternative to metal stabilizers and both techniques are superior to suture stabilization alone. The use of ZipFix may be preferred given its lower cost and ease of use.

Pectus Bar Dislocation: Comparison Between Three Different Stabilization Techniques Adopted in a Single Centre

BackgroundBar dislocation has always been considered a fearsome complication of Minimally Invasive Repair of Pectus Excavatum (MIRPE), therefore multiple techniques and types of stabilization have been introduced. The aim of the study is to compare different stabilization techniques in a cohort of patients operated by the same first operator. MethodsMIRPE was adopted at our institution in 2005. Data on MIRPE patients from January 2013 to December 2022 were collected prospectively and reviewed. Patients with a follow-up of at least 12 months were included. Throughout the years different ways of stabilization were used. Patients were divided in 3 groups according to the stabilization strategy adopted- Group A: no stabilizer; Group B: single bar fixation; Group C: bridge fixation. Dislocation was diagnosed if a bar rotated more than 30° or displaced laterally for more than 1.5 cm. We compared bar dislocation percentage of each group. ResultsWe positioned 733 bars in 468 patients. Group A included 113 bars (15.4%), Group B 415 bars (56.6%), Group C 205 bars (28%). No patients were lost at follow-up. Total dislocation rate was 4.1% (30 bars). Dislocation was observed in 10 bars of group A (8.8%), 20 bars of group B (4.8 %), 0 bars of group C (0%). Differences between groups were statistically significant. ConclusionsThe use of stabilizers reduced dislocation percentage. In particular, bridge fixation technique reduced to zero bar dislocation and is now our preferred technique of stabilization. Level of EvidenceIII.

A minimally invasive hybrid procedure to correct pectus arcuatum

BackgroundPectus arcuatum, also known as horns of steer anomaly or Currarino–Silverman Syndrome, is a distinct chest wall anomaly characterized by severe manubriosternal angulation, a shortened sternum, and mild pectus excavatum. The anomaly is typically repaired using open techniques, employing orthopedic fixation devices. Here, we report the results of a minimally invasive hybrid procedure to repair pectus arcuatum. MethodsThe procedure combines a standard Nuss procedure to correct the depressed sternum with a short upper chest (in boys) or inter-mammary (in girls) incision for bilateral subperichondrial resection of the upper costal cartilages, osteotomy, and correction of the manubrial angulation. The medical records of all patients who underwent the procedure over the last 10 years were reviewed. ResultsFive patients, 3 boys and 2 girls, aged 14 to 17 years, underwent the procedure. Three patients had their pectus bars removed 3–4 years after repair. Follow-up after correction ranged from 6 months to 7 years. Good correction resulted in all patients achieving recovery without complications and recurrence. To date, all patients have been satisfied with their results. ConclusionsThe minimally invasive hybrid procedure adequately corrects pectus arcuatum with minimal scarring and high satisfaction.

Impact of delayed removal of pectus bar on outcomes following Nuss repair: a retrospective analysis

BackgroundUsually, pectus bars are removed 3 years after the Nuss procedure in patients with pectus excavatum. However, the optimal timing for postoperative pectus bar removal remains undefined. Our study investigated the effects of delayed pectus bar removal after Nuss repairs.MethodsRetrospective data were collected on patients who underwent Nuss procedures for pectus excavatum and had their bars removed from August 2014 to December 2020. Patients with correction periods > 3 years were divided into group A (< 6 years) and group B (≥ 6 years). Propensity score matching was used to compare complications and radiological outcomes associated with bar removal.ResultsOf the 542 patients who underwent bar removal, 451 (Group A: 419 patients, Group B: 32) had correction duration > 3 years. The average correction duration was 4.5 ± 1.4 years. After propensity score matching analysis, group B [median duration: 8.0 (6.0–16.2) years] exhibited significantly longer median operative times (85 vs. 55 min; P = 0.026), higher callus formation rates (68.8% vs. 46.9%; P = 0.029), and greater median intraoperative blood loss (35 vs. 10 mL; P = 0.017) than group A [median duration: 4.2 (3.0–5.9) years]. However, following bar removal, the groups showed no statistical differences in the surgical complication rates (group A: 6.3% vs. group B: 9.4%; P = 0.648) or median ratio of radiological improvement (an improvement on the Haller index on chest radiography; 21.0% vs. 22.2%; P = 0.308).ConclusionsDelaying pectus bar removal after Nuss repair presents certain challenges but does not compromise overall outcomes. These findings suggest that a longer correction period may be unnecessary. However, further multicenter studies with long-term follow-up are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Body measurement changes in adults with pectus excavatum after the Nuss procedure: a study of 272 patients

BackgroundPectus excavatum (PE) is the most common congenital abnormality of the chest wall. Most patients with PE have slim bodies. Some studies have been conducted on the physical growth of children and adolescents who underwent the Nuss procedure. This study aimed to evaluate body measurement changes in adult patients with PE after the Nuss procedure.MethodsA total of 272 adult PE patients, who underwent the Nuss procedure and pectus bars removal from August 2014 to December 2020, were evaluated retrospectively. Body measurement [body height (BH), body weight (BW), and body mass index (BMI)] of the patients were collected before Nuss repair and after bar removal. We used the interquartile range (IQR) to identify and exclude outliers. Associations between changes in body measurement and clinical and radiological features were evaluated.ResultsThe BH, BW and BMI showed significantly increased after pectus bar removal, compared to pre-Nuss procedure parameters (BH 173.8 ± 5.9 cm vs. 173.9 ± 5.9 cm, P < 0.001; BW 60.3 ± 8.1 kg vs. 61.1 ± 8.8 kg, P = 0.005; BMI 19.9 ± 2.2 kg/m2 vs. 20.1 ± 2.4 kg/m2, P = 0.02). The same result were observed in the male subgroup, the HI ≥ 4 group and the male subgroup within the HI ≥ 4 group.ConclusionsThe BH, BW and BMI were significantly increased after completing surgical correction of PE using the Nuss procedure, particularly in young males and patients with more pronounced deformities.

The implementation of a pectus bar insertion enhanced recovery after surgery pathway: A quality improvement initiative.

Pectus excavatum repair is associated with significant discomfort, and pain is a primary contributor to postoperative hospital length of stay. Recent advances in postoperative pain control include the use of intercostal cryoablation techniques that may now make it possible to discharge patients on the day of surgery. Unnecessary variation in patient care and noncompliance with care bundles may be a factor in extended length of stay. The global aim of this quality improvement initiative was to successfully implement an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway on patients undergoing pectus excavatum repair. The SMART aim was to have a greater than 70% compliance for the perioperative bundle elements within 1 year of the pathway implementation. Multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were designed to create and implement an ERAS pathway for patients undergoing a pectus bar insertion procedure. This multidisciplinary pathway was designed, managed, and implemented with key stakeholders from the Departments of Evidence Based Practice, Surgery, Anesthesiology, and Perioperative Nursing. Patient characteristics, outcomes, and compliance with elements of the pathway were measured for analysis for both the baseline and post-intervention groups with monthly automated reports. After implementation of the ERAS pathway, data on the first 50 patients showed a 90% compliance with the perioperative bundle elements. Mean length of stay was significantly decreased from 33 h (95% CI [28.76, 37.31]) to 18 h (95% CI [14.54, 21.70]). There were zero readmissions within 24 hours for patients who were discharged on the day of surgery. Employing a multidisciplinary approach in both planning and execution that standardized clinician practices and minimized unnecessary variation in patient care, an ERAS pathway for pectus bar insertion has been successfully established at our institution.

Determining the Optimal Technique for Bar Fixation in the Repair of Pectus Excavatum.

Introduction: Pectus bar stabilizers are routinely used for bar fixation in the repair of pectus excavatum. We aimed to determine the optimum technique for bar fixation by reviewing our institutional experience with the use of bilateral, unilateral, and no stabilizer placement. Methods: Retrospective single pediatric center review of patients who underwent minimally invasive bar placement for pectus excavatum and subsequent bar removal between December 2001 and July 2019 was performed. Demographic data, details about the surgery, the number of bars and stabilizers used, and follow-up information were collected. Stabilizer-related complications included pain requiring stabilizer removal, surgical site infections (SSIs), and bar displacement. Data are presented as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) and frequencies with percentages. Results: A total of 561 patients were included. The cohort was predominantly male (83.1%, n = 466) with a median age at the time of bar placement of 15 years (IQR 12.4, 16.3) and a median Haller index of 3.8 (IQR 3.4, 4.5). Pain attributed to the stabilizer site that required removal was observed only in the bilateral stabilizer group (2.5%, n = 13). SSI related to the stabilizer site occurred in 1.8% (n = 9) of the bilateral stabilizer cases and 2.1% (n = 1) of the unilateral stabilizer cases. Bar displacement was observed in 0.6% (n = 3) of the bilateral stabilizer cases and 2 of those patients also had an SSI. There were no complications in the no stabilizer group. Conclusion: As the trend moves toward unilateral and no stabilizer use, we observe fewer cases of pain requiring stabilizer removal with no increase in bar displacements.

Crane-powered pectus excavatum repair: the NeoPectus surgery.

The conventional technique for pectus excavatum repair was pushing up the depressed chest wall by turning over the convexity of the bent pectus bar. We developed a new concept in which a total crane lift was used as the source of power to elevate the depressed sternum without using pectus bar leverage. This study aims to verify the efficacy of exclusively crane-powered pectus excavatum repair in recent years. Among the 3622 pectus deformity repairs since 1999, 691 cases repaired with the total crane power between 2017 and 2022 were enrolled. The mean age was 12.0 years (3-45). The operative technique involved wire/screw crane elevation of the sternum, the entire chest wall remodeling with the cross or parallel bars, the bridge/claw bar fixations, and other adjunctive techniques. Outcome analysis included morphological variations, patterns of pectus bar placement, and complication rates. The crane technique and pectoscopy (100%) were used. The bar placements were parallel (22.0%) and cross-bar (47.5%). The bar fixations were the claw fixators for a single bar (30.5%) and the bridge plates for multiple bars (69.5%). The flare-buster and magic strings were liberally used. No serious complications or catastrophic events occurred, but minor complications occurred in 16.9%: pneumothorax in 7.4% (51), pleural effusion in 1.6% (11), and wound problems in 0.4% (3). There was no case of bar displacement. The crane-powered pectus excavatum repair showed excellent results with minimal complications and no bar displacement. This innovative approach, part of the NeoPectus surgery, represents a significant advancement in correcting pectus excavatum deformities by utilizing a crane machine to elevate the chest wall.

Recent Advancements in Pectus Surgery: Crane Lifting, Multiple-Bar Approach, Bridge Stabilization, and Sandwich Technique

PurposeThe most recent procedure for pectus excavatum repair involves crane-powered entire chest wall remodeling, which employs crane lifting, multiple-bar approach, bridge stabilization, and sandwich techniques.This resulted in a paradigm shift in pectus deformity repair from merely lifting the sunken bone to remodeling the chest wall into normal anatomy. MethodsWe analyzed 649 patients who underwent surgery for pectus excavatum or complex combined deformities between March 2018 and January 2022. A crane with sternal wiring or screwing was used to lift the chest wall without using the pectus bar turning power. Multiple bars with bridge connections were placed to eliminate bar displacement. Modified sandwich techniques were applied to relieve the lower coastal flare (flare-buster) and focal protuberance (magic string). ResultsThe mean age of the patients included in the study was 12.2 years (range: 3–45 years). A single bar was used for 202 patients until 2021. For the multiple-bar technique, parallel bars (n = 142), crossbars (n = 166), and crossbars plus upper horizontal bars (XI pattern; n = 139) were used. The overall complication rate was 6.2 %. There was no cases of bar displacement were observed, but other minor complications such as pneumothorax (n = 20, 3.1 %), pleural effusion (n = 7, 1.1 %), and wound infection (n = 5, 0.8 %) were detected. Three patients required reoperation (infection, two: hemorrhage, one). ConclusionsThe crane-powered entire chest wall remodeling technique improved the safety and comprehensiveness of the repair procedure. By incorporating bridge stabilization and the use of multiple bars, we effectively resolved the issues related to bar displacement and incomplete repair. Type of StudyRetrospective Cohort Study. Level of Evidence3.

Preoperative Metal Allergy Testing for Pectus Excavatum Repair Does Not Effectively Identify Patients Who Develop Metal bar Allergy

BackgroundMetal allergy following placement of a metal pectus bar for minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) is a rare complication with potentially significant morbidity. There is no consensus regarding preoperative metal allergy testing (MAT). This study aims to assess incidence of metal allergy and titanium bar use in tested and untested patients and trends in MAT with different approaches to MAT. MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent MIRPE from July 2009 to June 2022 at a single institution. During this time, MAT was performed routinely (RT; routine testing) and selectively (ST; selective testing). ResultsThe cohort included 741 patients for analysis. Metal bar allergy was documented in 1.3 % of all patients; the incidence was 1.3 % in patients with MAT and 1.4 % without MAT. The incidence of bar allergy was 1.1 % in the RT group and 1.6 % in the ST group. In the RT group, bar allergy occurred in 1.4 % (3/216) of patients with a negative MAT. In the ST group, bar allergy occurred in 1.2 % (2/164) of patients with a negative MAT and in 1.9 % (3/162) of untested patients with a stainless-steel bar. Titanium bar use was not significantly different between the RT and ST groups (18.3 % vs 16.3 %, p > 0.05). ConclusionThe incidence of metal bar allergy after MIRPE was less than 2 %, and titanium bar use was not significantly different in routine and selective testing groups. MAT was not associated with a reduction in bar allergy, and its use remains unsupported. Level of EvidenceIII.

Titanium nitride coating of pectus bar increases metal contamination after minimally-invasive repair of pectus excavatum.

Previous studies demonstrated a release of toxic metals, e.g. nickel and chromium, from stainless steel bars used for minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE). In the present study, we investigated the impact of titanium nitride coating on the metal release and exposure of MIRPE patients. We analyzed the courses of nickel and chromium levels in blood, urine and local tissue in patients undergoing MIRPE with a titanium nitride coated pectus bar between 03/2017 and 10/2018. Sample collection was scheduled prior to MIRPE, at defined postoperative time points and at bar removal. Additionally, we evaluated irritative symptoms. Results were compared to a control group who received uncoated stainless steel bars in a previous time period (03/2015-02/2017). 12 patients received coated pectus bars (mean age 15.7 years). The control group included 28 patients. After implantation of a titanium nitride coated bar, significant increase in systemic nickel and chromium levels after one, two and three years was noted. In an interim analysis one year after MIRPE, we observed patients with coated bars to have significantly elevated trace metal values compared to the control group. This elevation persisted throughout the observation period. Tissue metal values were also significantly increased. Irritative symptoms occurred significantly more often in study patients compared to controls (50.0% vs. 14.3%). Coating of pectus bars with titanium nitride failed to reduce metal contamination after MIRPE. Instead, it resulted in a significant increase of trace metal levels after MIRPE, compared to patients with stainless steel bars, which may be explained by wear of the coating and inter-component mobilization processes.

Analysis of Factors Affecting Postoperative Opioid Requirement in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Pectus Excavatum Repair with Multimodal Analgesic Management.

Children with pectus excavatum are treated with surgical repair in a procedure known as minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE). MIRPE causes considerable postoperative pain, resulting in the administration of a substantial dose of opioids. This study aimed to identify perioperative factors that influence the requirement for opioids in children undergoing MIRPE. Retrospective data from children who underwent MIRPE were analyzed. A multimodal analgesic protocol was implemented with a continuous wound infiltration system and administration of non-opioid analgesics. Intravenous opioid analgesics were administered if the pain score was greater than 4. The cumulative opioid use was assessed by calculating the morphine equivalent dose at 6, 24, and 48 h after surgery. Perioperative factors affecting the postoperative opioid use were identified with multiple linear regression analyses. This study included 527 children aged 3-6 years, with a mean age of 3.9 years. Symmetrically depressed chest walls, a lower Haller index, and a lower revised depression index were found to be associated with decreased postoperative opioids. Boys required higher opioid doses than girls. Longer pectus bars (10 inches versus 9 inches) were associated with increased opioid use. Severity indices, gender, and the length of pectus bars influence postoperative opioid requirement in children undergoing MIRPE surgery with multimodal analgesia.

Opioid Use, Disposition, and Parent Satisfaction Following Common Pediatric Surgical Procedures.

There is wide variability in prescribing practices among providers, even for patients undergoing the same operations. Our study aims to analyze the variation in opioid prescription practices using a patient-centered approach to establish more appropriate prescribing guidelines for health care providers. We conducted phone surveys 30days after surgery to assess patient-reported opioid use. Over a two-year collection period, we identified patients that had undergone common outpatient pediatric surgery procedures in our 4-surgeon group. Included in the survey tool was the narcotic prescribed (if any), the amount used, and patient/family rating of pain control. We collected data for 189 separate procedures (88 umbilical hernias, 30 laparoscopic inguinal hernias, 2 open inguinal hernias, 41 appendectomies, 15 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, and 13 pectus bar removals). Patient age ranged from less than 1month to 246months. 83.5% of patients had a narcotic prescribed. The average number of doses used was 4, ranging from 0 (11.3%) to 30 (1.5%). 72.6% of families surveyed felt pain control was appropriate. However, 19.6% did feel they received too much pain medication. 10.6% reported completing their entire prescription; however, only 13.6% of families with excess narcotics reported proper disposal. Despite heightened awareness of the opioid epidemic, there is still a poor understanding of appropriate pain control regimens in the pediatric surgical population. We demonstrate that most patients are discharged home with excess opioids and that many families save the leftover pills/liquid. Further research and education are encouraged to limit the use of opioids in standard pediatric surgical procedures.

Pectus arcuatum: Description of a hybrid surgical technique

ObjetivesPectus Arcuatum (PA) is a very rare anterior chest wall deformity resulting from premature obliteration of the sternomanubrial junction. Unlike other chest wall deformities, surgical correction continues to be the only treatment option. We report our initial experience using the hybrid technique and evaluate the results. MethodsWe reviewed all the cases of PA that underwent a hybrid procedure between January 2020 and June 2022.We combined the Nuss procedure and the modified-Ravitch procedure. All patients underwent either percutaneous or thoracoscopic cryoanalgesia to improve postoperative pain management. The Nuss procedure was performed first. A single bar was inserted under thoracoscopic vision.Sternochondroplasty was performed through a 3-4-centimeter-long mid-sternal skin incision. After dissecting the sternal insertions of both pectoralis major muscles, bilateral subperichondrial chondrectomies were carried out and a wedge-shaped transverse sternal osteotomy was performed using an oscillating saw, preserving the posterior lamina. Sternal realignment was achieved by securing opposite sides of the osteotomy with two vertical titanium plates. ResultsThree patients with PA were subjected to the hybrid procedure between January 2019 and June 2022. The mean age was 15 years (14-16). No intraoperative complications were encountered. The mean operative time was 200 minutes. Postoperative radiography showed optimal sternal realignment and stabilization. Excellent esthetic results were obtained with high patient satisfaction in all cases. The overall hospital stay ranged from four to five days in all cases with optimal pain control. The mean follow-up was 26.6 months (6-38), recurrence was not noted after bar removal. ConclusionsThe simultaneous correction of the sternal depression, with the insertion of a single pectus bar, during the hybrid procedure enables surgeons to perform a less invasive sternochondroplasty and a single sternal wedge-osteotomy through a smaller and more esthetic mid-sternal skin incision, whilst maintaining chest-wall stability. The hybrid technique is a novel procedure that has been carried out successfully in the 3 cases reported in our study, with excellent esthetic results. To our knowledge cryoanalgesia has not been previously employed to better the postoperative pain management of patients undergoing surgical correction for PA.

Commentary: Technical Advancement of Pectus Bar Stabilization in Chest Wall Deformity Surgery: A 10-Year Trend and Appraisal with 1,500 Patients.

Commentary: Technical Advancement of Pectus Bar Stabilization in Chest Wall Deformity Surgery: A 10-Year Trend and Appraisal with 1,500 Patients.

Technical Advances in Pectus Bar Stabilization in Chest Wall Deformity Surgery: 10-Year Trends and an Appraisal with 1,500 Patients.

We aimed to demonstrate the advances we have achieved in pectus excavatum surgery over the last 10 years, with a particular focus on the refinement of pectus bar stabilization techniques and devices. In total, 1,526 patients who underwent minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum surgery from 2013 to 2022 were enrolled and analyzed. We have pursued a new paradigm of crane-powered remodeling of the entire chest wall. The method of bar stabilization has changed from claw fixators to hinge plates and, finally, to bridge plate connections. We also evaluated the effectiveness of the hinge plate (group H) and the bridge plate (group B). The bar displacement rates were 0.1% (n=2) for the claw fixator, 0% for the hinge plate (n=0), and 0% for the bridge plate (n=0). We stopped using the claw fixator in 2022 and the hinge plate in 2019. Since 2022, when we shifted to a multiple-bar technique for all patients, the bridge plate has replaced both the claw fixator and the hinge plate. No bar displacement occurred in either group. Group H had more pleural effusion, wound problems (p<0.05), and longer stays (5.5 vs. 6.2 days, p=0.034) than group B. We have made significant progress in pectus repair surgery over the last decade, particularly in stabilizing the pectus bar and reducing perioperative complications. Our current strategy is the multiple-bar approach with bridge stabilization. Since the bridge-only technique resulted in no bar displacement, we could eliminate the invasive claw fixator or hinge plate.

What Is the Appropriate Timing for Bar Removal After the Nuss Repair for Pectus Excavatum?

IntroductionThe Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum requires that the sternal elevation be maintained by indwelling metal bars that are traditionally removed approximately 3 y after the repair. MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients who underwent primary Nuss repair from 2007 to 2018 in two institutions and had a follow-up of at least 24 mo. Pectus bars had been left in place beyond 3 y in patients concerned over possible recurrence after bar removal. Structured interviews were held to assess pain, chest tightness, or other discomfort, and any adverse events related to pectus bars. Results were compared between patients in whom pectus bars were removed after 3 y (standard group) and those in whom bars were left in place longer (extended bar duration group). ResultsTwo hundred and thirty-one patients (91% males, mean age 23.9 ± 8.3, mean Haller index 4.9 ± 2.3) were included. Bar duration was 30.6 ± 6.6 mo in the standard group (51 patients) versus 69.1 ± 26.3 mo in the extended group (180 patients). Some discomfort was reported by 81.6% in the standard group versus 62.9% in the extended group (P = 0.033), and discomfort occurring at least monthly or more often was only reported by 30% in the standard versus 30.3% in the extended group (P = 1.000). Quality of life improved in 92.6% of the standard group versus 94.7% of the extended group (P = 1.000). No significant adverse events were reported in either group. ConclusionsOur data suggest that an extended bar duration after the Nuss repair may not cause any adverse event nor negatively affect quality of life.

Is There an Age Limit for the Nuss Repair?

Risk Factors and Techniques for Safe Pectus Bar Removal in Adults After Modified Nuss RepairThe Annals of Thoracic SurgeryPreviewThe Nuss repair involves implants designed for removal after 2 to 3 years. Although rare, significant complications can occur with bar removal, and the incidence of these complications may be higher in adults. This study was performed to review complications and risk factors associated with bar removal and discuss strategies to improve operative safety. Full-Text PDF

Risk Factors and Techniques for Safe Pectus Bar Removal in Adults After Modified Nuss Repair

BackgroundThe Nuss repair involves implants designed for removal after 2 to 3 years. Although rare, significant complications can occur with bar removal, and the incidence of these complications may be higher in adults. This study was performed to review complications and risk factors associated with bar removal and discuss strategies to improve operative safety. MethodsA retrospective study was performed including all patients after pectus excavatum repair who underwent Nuss implant removal at Mayo Clinic Arizona (Phoenix, AZ) from 2013 to 2022. ResultsIn total, 1555 bars were removed (683 patients; 71% men; median age, 34 years[(range, 15-71 years]). Of the removals, 12.45% of patients had bars placed at outside institutions. Major complications were rare, with bleeding most common (2.05%), followed by pneumothorax (0.88%), infection (0.59%), and effusions (0.44%). Most major bleeding (85.71%) occurred from the bar track during removal and was controlled by packing the track. One patient required subsequent hematoma evacuation and transfusion. Bleeding secondary to lung injury was also successfully controlled with packing. Bar removal in 1 patient with significantly displaced bars required sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass as a result of aortic injury. Risk factors identified for bleeding included sternal erosion (P < .001), bar migration (P < .001), higher number of bars (P = .037), and revision of a previous pectus repair (P = 0.001). Bar migration was additionally associated with major complications (P < .001). Older age, although a risk factor for overall complications (P = 0.001), was not a risk factor for bleeding. ConclusionsBar removal can be safely performed in most patients; however, significant complications, including bleeding, may occur. Identifying potential risk factors and being prepared for rescue maneuvers are critical to prevent catastrophic outcomes.