4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

The Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum: Evolution of techniques and early results on 322 patients

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 77, Issue 1, Pages 289-294

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01330-4

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The Nuss procedure is a minimally invasive technique using a retrosternal bar to repair pectus excavatum. Although its technical simplicity and cosmetic advantages are remarkable, early applications have been limited to children with symmetrical pectus excavatum. We report a large single-institution experience including technical modifications to correct asymmetric configurations and extend the procedure to adult patients. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 322 consecutive patients who underwent repair of pectus excavatum by the Nuss technique and its modifications between August 1999 and June 2002. Of the patients 251 (78%) were children and 71 (22%) were adults. Precise morphologic characterization of the pectus allowed appropriate shaping of the bar to achieve a symmetric repair. Results. Of the 322, 185 (57%) had symmetric and 137 (43%) had asymmetric pectus excavatum. Within the asymmetric group 71 were eccentric, 47 were unbalanced, and 19 were combined. Modifications to the shape of the bar including asymmetric and seagull bars were developed to deal with these types of asymmetry. A double bar or compound bar technique was used in most of the adults. Multipoint wire fixations to ribs were utilized to prevent bar rotation. Postoperative complications included pneumothorax (n=24, 7.5%) and bar displacement (n=11, 3.4%). The bar was removed in 42 patients 2 years after the initial procedure. Conclusions. Precise morphologic classification has led to modifications of the Nuss technique that facilitate correction of virtually all varieties of pectus excavatum including patients with asymmetric varieties and adults.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available