ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Revision after prior failed pectus excavatum repair: higher risks and greater complications than primary surgery.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extension of the minimally invasive pectus repair to adult patients: strategies for success.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Modified Nuss procedure in patients with recurrent pectus excavatum following the Ravitch procedure with a retained strut: report of two cases.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Pectus excavatum revision surgery: a complex challenge requiring centralization of expertise.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Revision of a prior failed pectus excavatum (PE) repair is occasionally required. These procedures may be technically more complex and have a greater risk of complications. This study was performed to evaluate the outcomes of adult patients undergoing revision procedures. Methods: A retrospective review of adult patients who underwent revision of a prior PE repair from 2010 to 2023 at Mayo Clinic Arizona was performed. Patients were classified by prior procedure [minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE), Open/Ravitch, and both] and the type of revision procedure performed [MIRPE, hybrid MIRPE, complex hybrid reconstruction, or complex reconstruction of acquired thoracic dystrophy (ATD)]. Outcomes and complications of these groups were analyzed and compared. Results: In total, 190 revision cases were included (mean age was 33±10 years; 72.6% males, mean Haller Index: 4.4±1.8). For the initial repair procedure, 90 (47.4%) patients had a previous MIRPE, 87 (45.8%) patients a prior open repair, and thirteen (6.8%) patients had both. Furthermore, 30 (15.8%) patients had two or more prior interventions. Patients having had a prior MIRPE were able to be repaired with a revision MIRPE in 82.2% of the cases. Conversely, patients with a prior open repair (including those who had both prior MIRPE and open repairs) were much more likely to require complex reconstructions (85%) as none of the ATD patients in this group had an attempted MIRPE. Operative times were shortest in the MIRPE redo approach and longest in the complex reconstruction of the ATD patients (MIRPE 3.5±1.3 hours, ATD 6.9±1.8 hours; P<0.001). The median length of hospital stay was 5 days [interquartile range (IQR), 3.0 days] with the shortest being the MIRPE approach and the longest occurring in the complex reconstruction of the ATD patients [MIRPE 4 days (IQR, 3.0 days); ATD 7 days (IQR, 4.0 days); P<0.001]. Major and minor complications were more frequent in the ATD complex reconstruction group. Preoperative chronic pain was present in over half of the patients (52.6%). Although resolution was seen in a significant number of patients, significant pain issues persisted in 8.8% of the patients postoperatively. Overall, persistent, long term chronic pain was greatest in the post open/Ravitch patient group (open 13.6% Conclusions: Revision of a prior failed PE repair can be technically complex with a high risk of complications, prolonged duration of surgery, and lengthy hospitalization. Chronic pain is prevalent and its failure to completely resolve after surgery is not uncommon. The initial failed repair will influence the type of procedure that can be performed and potentially subsequent complications. Even when some recurrences after previous PE surgeries can be repaired with acceptable results, this study demonstrates the importance of proper primary repair due to these increased risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.