ReviewJournal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons
Efficacy and Safety of Vacuum Bell Therapy in Pectus Excavatum: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes.
Review in Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pectus excavatum (PE) is the most common congenital chest wall deformity. The vacuum bell (VB) is a noninvasive alternative to surgical correction, increasingly used in pediatric and adolescent patients. However, evidence on its efficacy, safety, and predictors of success remains fragmented. Objective: To systematically review and synthesize available evidence on the efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes of VB therapy in patients with PE. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. Searches of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were performed up to July 15, 2025. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of VB therapy were included. Extracted data included patient demographics, treatment protocols, efficacy measures (sternal elevation, Haller Index reduction, and correction rates), safety outcomes (adverse events), and predictors of success. Risk of bias was assessed using standardized tools appropriate for each study design. Results: Twenty-seven studies comprising 2644 patients (predominantly male, aged 3-20 years) were included. Definitions of treatment success varied, with excellent correction reported in 11%-52.5% of cases and overall improvement (excellent + good) ranging from 60% to 80% across studies. Predictors of better outcomes included younger age (<10 years), shallow and symmetric deformity, and high adherence (>28 h/week or ≥12 months of therapy). Adverse events were infrequent and mild, including skin irritation and transient discomfort. Patient satisfaction was reported in 18 studies, while functional or psychosocial improvement was documented in 10. Conclusion: Vacuum bell therapy is safe and effective for selected patients with mild-to-moderate PE, especially when initiated early and used consistently. Standardized treatment protocols and longer follow-up studies are required to refine patient selection and optimize outcomes.
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.