Should wide chest wall resections and reconstruction intimidate thoracic surgeons?

Kuthan Kavaklı, Hakan Işık, Merve Şengül İnan, Ersin Sapmaz, Musab Yeniköy, Ufuk Ünsal, Denizhan Kılınç, Hasan Çaylak
{"title":"Should wide chest wall resections and reconstruction intimidate thoracic surgeons?","authors":"Kuthan Kavaklı, Hakan Işık, Merve Şengül İnan, Ersin Sapmaz, Musab Yeniköy, Ufuk Ünsal, Denizhan Kılınç, Hasan Çaylak","doi":"10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2024.25804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare patients in whom wide chest wall resection and reconstruction or primary closure was performed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 63 patients who underwent chest wall resection and reconstruction between January 2018 and December 2022 were included in the retrospective study. The patients were divided into two groups: the first group, which included 31 patients (14 males, 17 females; mean age: 44.6±16.4 years; range, 16 to 71 years) who were closed primarily, and the second group, constituting 32 patients (25 males, 7 females; mean age: 54.6±17.2 years; range, 9 to 80 years) who underwent reconstruction with plates and meshes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of smoking and diabetes. Primary chest wall or metastatic tumor was determined in 33 patients; benign tumor and trauma were determined in 30 patients. The difference between the two groups in mean defect diameter (p=0.009), mean number of plates used (p<0.001), and mean hospital stay (p<0.001) was statistically significant. However, there was no significant difference in terms of complications (p=0.426).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wide chest wall resection and reconstruction is a safe and feasible surgical procedure when compared with primary closure.</p>","PeriodicalId":49413,"journal":{"name":"Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"32 2","pages":"195-201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11197412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2024.25804","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare patients in whom wide chest wall resection and reconstruction or primary closure was performed.

Methods: A total of 63 patients who underwent chest wall resection and reconstruction between January 2018 and December 2022 were included in the retrospective study. The patients were divided into two groups: the first group, which included 31 patients (14 males, 17 females; mean age: 44.6±16.4 years; range, 16 to 71 years) who were closed primarily, and the second group, constituting 32 patients (25 males, 7 females; mean age: 54.6±17.2 years; range, 9 to 80 years) who underwent reconstruction with plates and meshes.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of smoking and diabetes. Primary chest wall or metastatic tumor was determined in 33 patients; benign tumor and trauma were determined in 30 patients. The difference between the two groups in mean defect diameter (p=0.009), mean number of plates used (p<0.001), and mean hospital stay (p<0.001) was statistically significant. However, there was no significant difference in terms of complications (p=0.426).

Conclusion: Wide chest wall resection and reconstruction is a safe and feasible surgical procedure when compared with primary closure.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宽胸壁切除和重建是否会让胸外科医生望而生畏?
背景:本研究旨在比较胸壁宽切除和重建术与原发性闭合术的患者:本研究旨在对实施宽胸壁切除和重建术或初次闭合术的患者进行比较:回顾性研究共纳入 2018 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月间接受胸壁切除和重建术的 63 例患者。将患者分为两组:第一组包括31名患者(14名男性,17名女性;平均年龄:(44.6±16.4)岁;范围:16至71岁),主要进行闭合;第二组包括32名患者(25名男性,7名女性;平均年龄:(54.6±17.2)岁;范围:9至80岁),使用钢板和网片进行重建:结果:两组患者在吸烟和糖尿病方面无明显差异。33例患者被确定为原发性胸壁肿瘤或转移性肿瘤,30例患者被确定为良性肿瘤和外伤。两组患者的平均缺损直径(P=0.009)、平均使用的钢板数量(P=0.009)、平均使用的钢板数量(P=0.009)和平均使用的钢板数量(P=0.009)均有差异:与原发闭合术相比,宽胸壁切除和重建是一种安全可行的手术方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
98
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery is an international open access journal which publishes original articles on topics in generality of Cardiac, Thoracic, Arterial, Venous, Lymphatic Disorders and their managements. These encompass all relevant clinical, surgical and experimental studies, editorials, current and collective reviews, technical know-how papers, case reports, interesting images, How to Do It papers, correspondences, and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
Can some inflammatory parameters predict the survival of patients with malignant pleural effusion? Comparison of the postoperative analgesic efficacy of serratus anterior plane block with different types of blocks for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Documentation of the current state of cardiopulmonary bypass management in Türkiye. Early postoperative outcomes of modified del Nido cardioplegia in coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with low ejection fraction. A rare spatial relation of the great arteries in patients with transposition of the great arteries: Posterior aorta and its effect on outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1