Efficacy Analysis of Modified Single-Incision Surgery for Repair of Pediatric Chest Wall Defects: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Jinlong Liu, Xiaoying Liu, Yong Wu, Rufang Zhang, Qilin Tao, Qiang Wang
{"title":"Efficacy Analysis of Modified Single-Incision Surgery for Repair of Pediatric Chest Wall Defects: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Jinlong Liu, Xiaoying Liu, Yong Wu, Rufang Zhang, Qilin Tao, Qiang Wang","doi":"10.62713/aic.3695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to compare the efficacy of modified single-incision surgery with that of traditional modified Ravitch surgery for the repair of pectus excavatum in pediatric patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective study, we included patients who underwent surgical correction for sternal depression from January 2015 to December 2020 across four major medical centers. Patients were categorized into two specific groups on the basis of the surgical technique employed: the modified single-incision surgery group, which comprised patients treated using the novel single-incision approach, and the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group, which included patients who received the conventional Ravitch surgery with multiple incisions. This study only included patients in the age range of 10 to 18 years, diagnosed with moderate to severe pectus excavatum, and lacked remarkable comorbid conditions that could influence surgical outcomes. Comprehensive data on preoperative characteristics, intraoperative variables, and postoperative results were collected for analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The modified single-incision surgery group showed significantly lower mean blood loss, mean operating time, mean hospital stay, postoperative drainage rate, postoperative mean Haller index and mean Haller index after bar removal compared to the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the surgical outcomes were significantly better in the modified single-incision surgery group (p = 0.010) than in the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group. The modified single-incision surgery group also had a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications, including pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary infection, bar rejection, and bar flipping and displacement (p < 0.05), than the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group. The modified single-incision surgery group showed significantly greater improvement in sternal depression depth compared to the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p = 0.031). Corrected symmetry was significantly better in the modified single-incision surgery group (p = 0.037). The overall satisfaction of patients in the modified single-incision surgery group was significantly higher than that in the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p = 0.011).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The modified single-incision procedure for the treatment of pectus excavatum offers considerable advantages over the traditional modified Ravitch surgery. The findings of this study suggest that the modified single-incision procedure is a safe and effective alternative for the correction of pectus excavatum.</p>","PeriodicalId":8210,"journal":{"name":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","volume":"95 6","pages":"1085-1094"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62713/aic.3695","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to compare the efficacy of modified single-incision surgery with that of traditional modified Ravitch surgery for the repair of pectus excavatum in pediatric patients.

Methods: In this retrospective study, we included patients who underwent surgical correction for sternal depression from January 2015 to December 2020 across four major medical centers. Patients were categorized into two specific groups on the basis of the surgical technique employed: the modified single-incision surgery group, which comprised patients treated using the novel single-incision approach, and the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group, which included patients who received the conventional Ravitch surgery with multiple incisions. This study only included patients in the age range of 10 to 18 years, diagnosed with moderate to severe pectus excavatum, and lacked remarkable comorbid conditions that could influence surgical outcomes. Comprehensive data on preoperative characteristics, intraoperative variables, and postoperative results were collected for analysis.

Results: The modified single-incision surgery group showed significantly lower mean blood loss, mean operating time, mean hospital stay, postoperative drainage rate, postoperative mean Haller index and mean Haller index after bar removal compared to the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the surgical outcomes were significantly better in the modified single-incision surgery group (p = 0.010) than in the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group. The modified single-incision surgery group also had a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications, including pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary infection, bar rejection, and bar flipping and displacement (p < 0.05), than the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group. The modified single-incision surgery group showed significantly greater improvement in sternal depression depth compared to the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p = 0.031). Corrected symmetry was significantly better in the modified single-incision surgery group (p = 0.037). The overall satisfaction of patients in the modified single-incision surgery group was significantly higher than that in the traditional modified Ravitch surgery group (p = 0.011).

Conclusions: The modified single-incision procedure for the treatment of pectus excavatum offers considerable advantages over the traditional modified Ravitch surgery. The findings of this study suggest that the modified single-incision procedure is a safe and effective alternative for the correction of pectus excavatum.

改良单切口手术修复小儿胸壁缺损的疗效分析:回顾性队列研究。
目的:比较改良单切口手术与传统改良Ravitch手术修复小儿漏斗胸的疗效。方法:在这项回顾性研究中,我们纳入了2015年1月至2020年12月在四个主要医疗中心接受胸骨凹陷手术矫正的患者。根据所采用的手术技术将患者分为两组:改良单切口手术组,包括采用新型单切口入路治疗的患者;传统改良Ravitch手术组,包括接受常规多切口Ravitch手术的患者。本研究仅纳入年龄在10至18岁之间、诊断为中度至重度漏斗胸的患者,且缺乏影响手术结果的显著合并症。收集术前特征、术中变量和术后结果的综合数据进行分析。结果:改良单切口手术组平均出血量、平均手术时间、平均住院时间、术后引流率、术后平均Haller指数、拔棒后平均Haller指数均显著低于传统改良Ravitch手术组(p < 0.05)。改良单切口手术组的手术效果明显优于传统改良Ravitch手术组(p = 0.010)。改良单切口手术组术后并发症气胸、胸腔积液、肺部感染、排棒排斥反应、排棒翻转移位发生率也明显低于传统改良Ravitch手术组(p < 0.05)。改良单切口手术组胸骨凹陷深度改善明显高于传统改良Ravitch手术组(p = 0.031)。改良单切口手术组矫正对称性明显更好(p = 0.037)。改良单切口手术组患者总体满意度显著高于传统改良Ravitch手术组(p = 0.011)。结论:改良单切口手术治疗漏斗胸较传统改良Ravitch手术有明显优势。本研究结果提示改良的单切口手术是一种安全有效的矫正漏斗胸的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annali Italiani di Chirurgia is a bimonthly journal and covers all aspects of surgery:elective, emergency and experimental surgery, as well as problems involving technology, teaching, organization and forensic medicine. The articles are published in Italian or English, though English is preferred because it facilitates the international diffusion of the journal (v.Guidelines for Authors and Norme per gli Autori). The articles published are divided into three main sections:editorials, original articles, and case reports and innovations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信