• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

既往漏斗胸修复失败后的翻修手术:风险高于初次手术,并发症更多。

Revision after prior failed pectus excavatum repair: higher risks and greater complications than primary surgery.

作者信息

Shawwaf Kenan A, Aly Mohamed R, Botros Michael M, Moosavi Ryan S, Zeineddine Rawan M, Lackey Jesse J, Sandstrom Beth, Farina Juan M, Jaroszewski Dawn E

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

出版信息

J Thorac Dis. 2024 Jul 30;16(7):4359-4378. doi: 10.21037/jtd-24-417. Epub 2024 Jul 18.

DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-417
PMID:39144342
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11320290/
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% MIRPE 3.6%, P=0.02).

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.

摘要

背景

偶尔需要对先前失败的漏斗胸(PE)修复进行翻修。这些手术在技术上可能更复杂,并发症风险更高。本研究旨在评估接受翻修手术的成年患者的治疗结果。

方法

对2010年至2023年在亚利桑那州梅奥诊所接受先前PE修复翻修的成年患者进行回顾性研究。患者按先前手术方式[漏斗胸微创修复术(MIRPE)、开放/拉维奇手术,以及两者皆有]和所进行的翻修手术类型[MIRPE、混合MIRPE、复杂混合重建,或后天性胸廓发育不良(ATD)的复杂重建]进行分类。分析并比较这些组别的治疗结果和并发症。

结果

共纳入190例翻修病例(平均年龄33±10岁;72.6%为男性,平均哈勒指数:4.4±1.8)。对于初次修复手术,90例(47.4%)患者先前接受过MIRPE,87例(45.8%)患者先前接受过开放修复,13例(6.8%)患者两者皆有。此外,30例(15.8%)患者接受过两次或更多次先前干预。先前接受过MIRPE的患者中,82.2%的病例能够通过翻修MIRPE进行修复。相反,先前接受过开放修复的患者(包括那些先前既接受过MIRPE又接受过开放修复的患者)更有可能需要复杂重建(85%),因为该组中没有ATD患者尝试进行MIRPE。手术时间在MIRPE再次手术方法中最短,在ATD患者的复杂重建中最长(MIRPE为3.5±1.3小时,ATD为6.9±1.8小时;P<0.001)。住院时间中位数为5天[四分位间距(IQR),3.0天],最短的是MIRPE方法,最长的发生在ATD患者的复杂重建中[MIRPE为4天(IQR,3.0天);ATD为7天(IQR,4.0天);P<0.001]。ATD复杂重建组的主要和次要并发症更常见。超过一半的患者(52.6%)术前存在慢性疼痛。尽管大量患者疼痛得到缓解,但术后仍有8.8%的患者存在明显的疼痛问题。总体而言,开放/拉维奇术后患者组持续的长期慢性疼痛最为严重(开放组为13.6%,MIRPE组为3.6%,P=0.02)。

结论

对先前失败的PE修复进行翻修在技术上可能很复杂,并发症风险高,手术时间长,住院时间长。慢性疼痛很普遍,术后未能完全缓解并不罕见。初次修复失败会影响可进行的手术类型以及潜在的后续并发症。即使先前PE手术后的一些复发可以通过可接受的结果进行修复,但本研究表明由于这些风险增加,正确的初次修复非常重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/883a3a332bf3/jtd-16-07-4359-f13.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/702f2a104b92/jtd-16-07-4359-f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/d989ffe65732/jtd-16-07-4359-f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/2bee97dca270/jtd-16-07-4359-f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/97b1a378b2dd/jtd-16-07-4359-f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/dfeb7ba0915c/jtd-16-07-4359-f5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/bd018348d3a8/jtd-16-07-4359-f6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/5c26e6a20161/jtd-16-07-4359-f7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/52ee1df33583/jtd-16-07-4359-f8.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/61713cdea9ea/jtd-16-07-4359-vid1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/20504ab2c378/jtd-16-07-4359-f9.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/051cdf356587/jtd-16-07-4359-f10.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/b414f6d43a39/jtd-16-07-4359-f11.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/8b9c08cd9fc9/jtd-16-07-4359-f12.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/883a3a332bf3/jtd-16-07-4359-f13.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/702f2a104b92/jtd-16-07-4359-f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/d989ffe65732/jtd-16-07-4359-f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/2bee97dca270/jtd-16-07-4359-f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/97b1a378b2dd/jtd-16-07-4359-f4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/dfeb7ba0915c/jtd-16-07-4359-f5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/bd018348d3a8/jtd-16-07-4359-f6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/5c26e6a20161/jtd-16-07-4359-f7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/52ee1df33583/jtd-16-07-4359-f8.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/61713cdea9ea/jtd-16-07-4359-vid1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/20504ab2c378/jtd-16-07-4359-f9.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/051cdf356587/jtd-16-07-4359-f10.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/b414f6d43a39/jtd-16-07-4359-f11.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/8b9c08cd9fc9/jtd-16-07-4359-f12.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f773/11320290/883a3a332bf3/jtd-16-07-4359-f13.jpg

相似文献

1
Revision after prior failed pectus excavatum repair: higher risks and greater complications than primary surgery.既往漏斗胸修复失败后的翻修手术:风险高于初次手术,并发症更多。
J Thorac Dis. 2024 Jul 30;16(7):4359-4378. doi: 10.21037/jtd-24-417. Epub 2024 Jul 18.
2
Revision of Failed Prior Nuss in Adult Patients With Pectus Excavatum.成人漏斗胸患者失败的既往 Nuss 手术修复。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Feb;105(2):371-378. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.08.051. Epub 2017 Dec 2.
3
Hybrid Technique for Repair of Recurrent Pectus Excavatum After Failed Open Repair.开放性修复失败后复发性漏斗胸的杂交修复技术
Ann Thorac Surg. 2015 Jun;99(6):1936-43. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.02.078. Epub 2015 Apr 25.
4
[Surgical repair of recurrent pectus excavatum in adults and adolescents].成人及青少年复发性漏斗胸的手术修复
Rozhl Chir. 2015 Mar;94(3):111-6.
5
Revision of failed, recurrent or complicated pectus excavatum after Nuss, Ravitch or cardiac surgery.努斯手术、拉维奇手术或心脏手术后失败、复发或复杂漏斗胸的修复。
J Vis Surg. 2016 Apr 5;2:74. doi: 10.21037/jovs.2016.03.17. eCollection 2016.
6
Reduced hospitalization cost for patients with pectus excavatum treated using minimally invasive surgery.采用微创手术治疗漏斗胸患者可降低住院费用。
Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1609-13. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8767-0. Epub 2003 Jul 21.
7
Efficacy and Safety of Taulinoplasty Compared with the Minimally Invasive Repair of Pectus Excavatum Approach to Correct Pectus Excavatum.陶林氏手术与微创修复漏斗胸术治疗漏斗胸的疗效和安全性比较。
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2021 Dec;31(12):1402-1407. doi: 10.1089/lap.2021.0216. Epub 2021 Nov 29.
8
[Short-term results of minimally invasive pectus excavatum repair in adult patients].[成人漏斗胸微创修复术的短期结果]
Rozhl Chir. 2016 Jan;95(1):25-32.
9
Nuss procedure for repair of pectus excavatum after failed Ravitch procedure in adults: indications and caveats.成人Ravitch手术失败后采用Nuss手术修复漏斗胸:适应症及注意事项
J Thorac Dis. 2016 Aug;8(8):1981-5. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.06.60.
10
Impact of Cryoanalgesia Use During Minimally Invasive Pectus Excavatum Repair on Hospital Days and Total Hospital Costs Among Pediatric Patients.微创漏斗胸矫正术中使用冷冻镇痛对儿科患者住院天数和总住院费用的影响。
J Pediatr Surg. 2023 Jul;58(7):1235-1238. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.02.036. Epub 2023 Feb 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Pectus excavatum revision surgery: a complex challenge requiring centralization of expertise.漏斗胸修复手术:一项需要专业知识集中化的复杂挑战。
J Thorac Dis. 2025 Mar 31;17(3):1126-1130. doi: 10.21037/jtd-24-1883. Epub 2025 Mar 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum in adults: a review article of presentation, workup, and surgical treatment.成人漏斗胸的微创修复:关于临床表现、检查及外科治疗的综述文章
J Thorac Dis. 2023 Sep 28;15(9):5150-5173. doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-87. Epub 2023 Jun 19.
2
Sternal elevation by the crane technique during pectus excavatum repair: A quantitative analysis.漏斗胸修复术中采用起重机技术进行胸骨抬高:定量分析
JTCVS Tech. 2021 Jul 17;9:167-175. doi: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2021.05.028. eCollection 2021 Oct.
3
Adult pectus excavatum repair: national outcomes of the Nuss and Ravitch procedures.
成人漏斗胸修复术:Nuss手术和Ravitch手术的全国治疗结果
J Thorac Dis. 2021 Mar;13(3):1396-1402. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-2422.
4
Complications after Ravitch versus Nuss repair of pectus excavatum: A Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) General Thoracic Surgery Database analysis.漏斗胸 Ravitch 修复与 Nuss 修复术后的并发症:胸外科医师学会(STS)普通胸外科数据库分析。
Surgery. 2021 Jun;169(6):1493-1499. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.12.023. Epub 2021 Jan 22.
5
Sternocostal instability after Ravitch repair in adolescents; 3 case-reports and a review of surgical techniques in the literature.青少年Ravitch修复术后的胸肋不稳定;3例病例报告及文献中手术技术综述
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2020 Mar 25;8(3):e2720. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002720. eCollection 2020 Mar.
6
Reoperative Pectus Repair Using Biomaterials.使用生物材料进行再次胸廓成形术修复。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2020 Aug;110(2):383-389. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.02.070. Epub 2020 Apr 3.
7
Revision of Failed Prior Nuss in Adult Patients With Pectus Excavatum.成人漏斗胸患者失败的既往 Nuss 手术修复。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Feb;105(2):371-378. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.08.051. Epub 2017 Dec 2.
8
Revision of failed, recurrent or complicated pectus excavatum after Nuss, Ravitch or cardiac surgery.努斯手术、拉维奇手术或心脏手术后失败、复发或复杂漏斗胸的修复。
J Vis Surg. 2016 Apr 5;2:74. doi: 10.21037/jovs.2016.03.17. eCollection 2016.
9
Pectus excavatum from a pediatric surgeon's perspective.从儿科外科医生角度看漏斗胸
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2016 Sep;5(5):493-500. doi: 10.21037/acs.2016.06.04.
10
Nuss procedure for repair of pectus excavatum after failed Ravitch procedure in adults: indications and caveats.成人Ravitch手术失败后采用Nuss手术修复漏斗胸:适应症及注意事项
J Thorac Dis. 2016 Aug;8(8):1981-5. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.06.60.