ArticleJTCVS techniques2024
Surgical treatment and outcomes of pectus arcuatum.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of an integrated stepwise rehabilitation model following Nuss procedure in pediatric patients.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive surgical correction technique of Pectus Arcuatum, case report of an innovative method for a rare chest wall malformation (Jerusalem technique).Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Pectus arcuatum is a rare variant of pectus deformities that can cause varying degrees of cardiac compression. A review of the evaluation, surgical repair, and outcomes of pectus arcuatum is presented. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing surgical treatment of pectus arcuatum at a single institution was conducted between January 1, 2010, and May 31, 2024. Descriptive statistics and surgical techniques are presented. Results: Twenty patients underwent pectus arcuatum repair (median age, 22.9 years; 55.0% males, median Haller index 2.8 [interquartile range {IQR}, 2.2, 3.6]) during the study period. Preoperatively, all patients were bothered by their chest appearance and symptomatic, with the most common symptoms being exercise intolerance (95.0%), chest pain (90.0%), and shortness of breath (90.0%). Preoperatively, cardiopulmonary exercise testing was performed in almost half the patients with abnormal findings (median maximum oxygen consumption, 67.0% of predicted). A hybrid approach with sternal osteotomy and minimally invasive pectus excavatum repair was utilized in 19 out of 20 cases, with 1 case requiring sternal osteotomy only. Single wedge osteotomy was sufficient in most cases (70.0%). Median intraoperative time was 3.5 hours (IQR, 3.1, 4.2 hours). The adoption of cryoablation in 2018 significantly reduced hospital stays, from 5.0 days (IQR, 4.5, 6.0 days) to 3.0 days (IQR, 2.8, 5.0 days) ( Conclusions: Pectus arcuatum can be successfully repaired with a hybrid surgical approach involving sternal osteotomy and Nuss bar placement. Symptomatic patients should be considered for surgery, with postoperative improvement expected.
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.