修复失败后的翻修手术:与初次手术相比,风险更高,并发症更多。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Journal of thoracic disease Pub Date : 2024-07-30 Epub Date: 2024-07-18 DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-417
Kenan A Shawwaf, Mohamed R Aly, Michael M Botros, Ryan S Moosavi, Rawan M Zeineddine, Jesse J Lackey, Beth Sandstrom, Juan M Farina, Dawn E Jaroszewski
{"title":"修复失败后的翻修手术:与初次手术相比,风险更高,并发症更多。","authors":"Kenan A Shawwaf, Mohamed R Aly, Michael M Botros, Ryan S Moosavi, Rawan M Zeineddine, Jesse J Lackey, Beth Sandstrom, Juan M Farina, Dawn E Jaroszewski","doi":"10.21037/jtd-24-417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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% <i>vs.</i> MIRPE 3.6%, P=0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":17542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of thoracic disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11320290/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revision after prior failed pectus excavatum repair: higher risks and greater complications than primary surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Kenan A Shawwaf, Mohamed R Aly, Michael M Botros, Ryan S Moosavi, Rawan M Zeineddine, Jesse J Lackey, Beth Sandstrom, Juan M Farina, Dawn E Jaroszewski\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/jtd-24-417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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% <i>vs.</i> MIRPE 3.6%, P=0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11320290/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-417\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of thoracic disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-417","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有时需要对之前失败的胸大肌(PE)修复术进行翻修。这些手术在技术上可能更为复杂,并发症风险也更高。本研究旨在评估接受翻修手术的成年患者的治疗效果:方法:本研究对亚利桑那州梅奥诊所 2010 年至 2023 年期间接受前次 PE 修复术翻修的成年患者进行了回顾性研究。患者按照之前的手术方式[胸肌微创修复术(MIRPE)、开放式/拉维奇手术以及两者兼而有之]和进行的翻修手术类型[MIRPE、混合MIRPE、复杂混合重建或获得性胸廓营养不良(ATD)复杂重建]进行分类。结果:共纳入 190 例翻修病例(平均年龄为 33±10 岁;72.6% 为男性;平均霍勒指数:4.4±1.8)。在初次修复手术中,90 名患者(47.4%)曾接受过 MIRPE,87 名患者(45.8%)曾接受过开放式修复,13 名患者(6.8%)同时接受了这两种手术。此外,30 名患者(15.8%)曾接受过两次或两次以上的介入治疗。在 82.2% 的病例中,曾接受过 MIRPE 的患者可以通过翻修 MIRPE 进行修复。相反,既往接受过开放性修复的患者(包括既往接受过 MIRPE 又接受过开放性修复的患者)更有可能需要复杂的重建手术(85%),因为这组 ATD 患者都没有尝试过 MIRPE。MIRPE重做方法的手术时间最短,而ATD患者的复杂重建手术时间最长(MIRPE为3.5±1.3小时,ATD为6.9±1.8小时;Pvs.MIRPE为3.6%,P=0.02):结论:对先前失败的 PE 修复术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,术后疼痛不能完全缓解的情况也不少见。初次失败的修复手术会影响可实施的手术类型以及可能出现的后续并发症。即使以前的 PE 手术后的一些复发病例可以通过修复获得可接受的效果,但由于风险增加,本研究表明了正确的初次修复的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Revision after prior failed pectus excavatum repair: higher risks and greater complications than primary surgery.

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% vs. 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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of thoracic disease
Journal of thoracic disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
254
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD, J Thorac Dis, pISSN: 2072-1439; eISSN: 2077-6624) was founded in Dec 2009, and indexed in PubMed in Dec 2011 and Science Citation Index SCI in Feb 2013. It is published quarterly (Dec 2009- Dec 2011), bimonthly (Jan 2012 - Dec 2013), monthly (Jan. 2014-) and openly distributed worldwide. JTD received its impact factor of 2.365 for the year 2016. JTD publishes manuscripts that describe new findings and provide current, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease. All the submission and reviewing are conducted electronically so that rapid review is assured.
期刊最新文献
A prediction model based on computed tomography characteristics for identifying malignant from benign sub-centimeter solid pulmonary nodules. Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis a narrative review primary focus on treatments. Bronchoscopic holmium laser ablation continuous cryoablation for the treatment of airway stenosis caused by tissue hyperplasia after tracheal intubation: clinical case observation. Can the rest of the world replicate excellent segmentectomy outcomes with lower volume thoracic surgeons? Chest wall resections for non-small cell lung cancer: a literature review.
×
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