Minimization of the complications associated with bar removal after the Nuss procedure in adults

Impact of delayed removal of pectus bar on outcomes following Nuss repair: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Usually, pectus bars are removed 3 years after the Nuss procedure in patients with pectus excavatum. However, the optimal timing for postoperative pectus bar removal remains undefined. Our study investigated the effects of delayed pectus bar removal after Nuss repairs.

METHODS

Retrospective data were collected on patients who underwent Nuss procedures for pectus excavatum and had their bars removed from August 2014 to December 2020. Patients with correction periods > 3 years were divided into group A (< 6 years) and group B (≥ 6 years). Propensity score matching was used to compare complications and radiological outcomes associated with bar removal.

RESULTS

Of the 542 patients who underwent bar removal, 451 (Group A: 419 patients, Group B: 32) had correction duration > 3 years. The average correction duration was 4.5 ± 1.4 years. After propensity score matching analysis, group B [median duration: 8.0 (6.0-16.2) years] exhibited significantly longer median operative times (85 vs. 55 min; P = 0.026), higher callus formation rates (68.8% vs. 46.9%; P = 0.029), and greater median intraoperative blood loss (35 vs. 10 mL; P = 0.017) than group A [median duration: 4.2 (3.0-5.9) years]. However, following bar removal, the groups showed no statistical differences in the surgical complication rates (group A: 6.3% vs. group B: 9.4%; P = 0.648) or median ratio of radiological improvement (an improvement on the Haller index on chest radiography; 21.0% vs. 22.2%; P = 0.308).

CONCLUSIONS

Delaying pectus bar removal after Nuss repair presents certain challenges but does not compromise overall outcomes. These findings suggest that a longer correction period may be unnecessary. However, further multicenter studies with long-term follow-up are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Risk Factors and Techniques for Safe Pectus Bar Removal in Adults After Modified Nuss Repair

BACKGROUND

The Nuss repair involves implants designed for removal after 2 to 3 years. Although rare, significant complications can occur with bar removal, and the incidence of these complications may be higher in adults. This study was performed to review complications and risk factors associated with bar removal and discuss strategies to improve operative safety.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed including all patients after pectus excavatum repair who underwent Nuss implant removal at Mayo Clinic Arizona (Phoenix, AZ) from 2013 to 2022.

RESULTS

In total, 1555 bars were removed (683 patients; 71% men; median age, 34 years[(range, 15-71 years]). Of the removals, 12.45% of patients had bars placed at outside institutions. Major complications were rare, with bleeding most common (2.05%), followed by pneumothorax (0.88%), infection (0.59%), and effusions (0.44%). Most major bleeding (85.71%) occurred from the bar track during removal and was controlled by packing the track. One patient required subsequent hematoma evacuation and transfusion. Bleeding secondary to lung injury was also successfully controlled with packing. Bar removal in 1 patient with significantly displaced bars required sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass as a result of aortic injury. Risk factors identified for bleeding included sternal erosion (P < .001), bar migration (P < .001), higher number of bars (P = .037), and revision of a previous pectus repair (P = 0.001). Bar migration was additionally associated with major complications (P < .001). Older age, although a risk factor for overall complications (P = 0.001), was not a risk factor for bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Bar removal can be safely performed in most patients; however, significant complications, including bleeding, may occur. Identifying potential risk factors and being prepared for rescue maneuvers are critical to prevent catastrophic outcomes.

[Influencing factors on operating times for metal bar removal after Nuss repair]

BACKGROUND

Metal bar removal after the Nuss repair procedure is prone to be cancelled in cases of operating time shortages due it being suitable to be postponed without harming patients. Consequently, planning operation times as exactly as possible could be one solution.

OBJECTIVE

Statistical modelling of operation times of metal bar removal after Nuss repair using the prespecified independent predictors of age, sex, intraoperative complications, and number of implanted metal bars.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included all patients whose operation notes included an operation time, which was modelled via linear regression and subject to internal validation via bootstrap. Exploratory analyses also consisted of the surgeon's experience, the number of stabilizers, the body mass index, and preceding re-do surgery for bar dislocation.

RESULTS

We included 265 patients (14% ♀) with a median age of 19 years (interquartile range 17-20 years), of whom 81% had 1 and 17% had 2 metal bars removed. The prespecified regression model was statistically significant (likelihood ratio 56; df = 5; P < 0.001) and had a bias corrected R2 of 0.148. Patient age influenced operation times by 2.1min per year of life (95% confidence interval 1.3-2.9min; P < 0.001) and 16min per explanted metal bar (95% confidence interval: 10-22min; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The patient-specific factors of age and the number of explanted metal bars influenced the operation times and can be included into scheduling operation times.

Post bar removal results of pectus deformity patients who underwent minimally invasive correction

Introduction

The most common chest wall deformities are pectus excavatum and pectus carinatum. Surgical repair of these deformities via minimally invasive technique using pectus bars is commonly preferred by numerous thoracic surgeons. Despite this common choice for treatment, the duration of the bar stay, the bar removal process, the possible complications and ways to prevent them have been debated over the years and still there is no single decision.

Aim

To determine the decision making, surgical outcomes and negative factors in the bar removal process.

Material and methods

There were 1032 patients underwent bar removal between 2006-2020 and their data was recorded prospectively. We analyzed patients' demographics, family history, Haller index, bar count, body mass index, stabilizer and wire usage, length of hospital stay, time until bar removal, incision side and complications retrospectively.

Results

There was no significant correlation between BMI and surgery time (p = 0.748). There was no statistically significant correlation between the age groups and the number of pectus bars removed. The other factors showed no significant difference. The surgery time was found to be significantly longer in those with callus tissue (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

These findings suggest that pectus bars can be left in place for a shorter time than the standard 3-year interval without any additional recurrence risk and without compromising quality of life. As a result, patients with persistent pain after pectus repair should be well evaluated for the possibility of life-threatening complications during bar removal.

Erector Spinae Plane Block With Liposomal Bupivacaine: Analgesic Adjunct in Adult Pectus Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Pain management may be challenging in patients undergoing pectus excavatum (PE) bar removal surgery. To enhance recovery, opioid sparing strategies with regional anesthesia including ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) have been implemented. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of bilateral ESPB with a liposomal bupivacaine/traditional bupivacaine mixture as part of an enhanced patient recovery pathway.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of adult patients who underwent PE bar removal from January 2019 to December 2020 was performed. Perioperative data were reviewed and recorded. Patients who received ESPB were compared to historical controls (non-ESPB patients).

RESULTS

A total of 202 patients were included (non-ESPB: 124 patients; ESPB: 78 patients). No adverse events were attributed to ESPB. Non-ESPB patients received more intraoperative opioids (milligram morphine equivalents; 41.8 ± 17.0 mg versus 36.7 ± 17.1, P = 0.05) and were more likely to present to the emergency department within 7 d postoperatively (4.8% versus 0%, P = 0.05) when compared to ESPB patients. No significant difference in total perioperative milligram morphine equivalents, severe pain in postanesthesia care unit (PACU), time from PACU arrival to analgesic administration, PACU length of stay, or postprocedure admission rates between groups were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PE bar removal surgery, bilateral ESPB with liposomal bupivacaine was performed without complications. ESPB with liposomal bupivacaine may be considered as an analgesic adjunct to enhance recovery in patients undergoing cardiothoracic procedures but further prospective randomized clinical trials comparing liposomal bupivacaine to traditional local anesthetics with and without indwelling nerve catheters are necessary.

Complications following metal bar removal after Nuss repair are rare in a duocentric retrospective evaluation

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive pectus excavatum repair has gained widespread acceptance and its results and complications are well-described. However, there is a substantial debate on the risks and frequencies of complications following metal bar removal. We, therefore, aimed to analyse all complications that occurred during and after metal bar removal at our two paediatric surgical centres.

METHODS

Bar removal surgeries were identified via procedural codes and electronic records were reviewed using a pre-specified data extraction chart. Both intra- and postoperative complications were included and the latter scored according to Clavien-Dindo. We analysed the influence of the pre-specified potential predictors age, sex, and the number of implanted metal bars on the occurrence of complications using logistic regression.

RESULTS

We included 279 patients with a median age of 19 years (interquartile range 17-20 years). 15 patients experienced 17 complications. Of 11 postoperative complications, only an enlarging pleural effusion required a chest drain in local anaesthesia, resulting in a Claven-Dindo grade IIIa, whereas the remainder were classified as grade I. Neither age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.13, P = 0.73), nor sex (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.19-4.07, P = 0.87) or the number of bars (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.15-2.71, P = 0.547) did influence the occurrence of complications.

CONCLUSION

Complications following metal bar removal were scarce in our duocentric retrospective series and usually of minor relevance. However, to address the perceived paucity of data on the frequency and severity of complications following metal bar removal, further studies, including large database research is necessary.

Comparison of the Standard vs. Thoracoscopic Extrapleural Modification of the Nuss Procedure—Two Centers’ Experiences

Pectus excavatum is the most common congenital anterior chest wall deformity, with an incidence of 1:400 to 1:1000. Surgical strategy has evolved with the revolutionary idea of Donald Nuss, who was a pioneer in the operative correction of this deformity using minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this paper is to compare the preliminary results of pectus excavatum repair in two University Centers with a moderate number of patients using the standard Nuss procedure and its modification, the extrapleural thoracoscopic approach. The statistical analysis showed no significant difference for the patient’s age (14.52 ± 3.70 vs. 14.57 ± 1.86; p = 0.95) and the CT Haller index (4.17 ± 1.58 vs. 3.78 ± 0.95; p = 0.32). A statistically significant difference was noted for the duration of a pectus bar implant (2.16 ± 0.24 vs. 2.48 ± 0.68; p = 0.03) between the Maribor and Novi Sad Center. We report 14 complications (28%), including dislocation of the pectus bar (10%), pleural effusion (8%), wound inflammation (6%), pericarditis (2%) and an allergic reaction to the pectus bar (2%). Standard and thoracoscopic extrapleural Nuss procedures are both safe and effective procedures used to correct a pectus excavatum deformity. The choice of surgical procedure should be made according to a surgeon’s reliability in performing a particular procedure. Our study found no advantages of one procedure over the other.

"When to Nuss? patient age as a risk factor for complications of minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum: a systematic review and meta-analysis"

PURPOSE

The optimal age for minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) is unclear; this study investigates the differences in complication rates among different age groups undergoing repair.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched from inception to October 2020. To assess age as a risk factor for complications, odds ratios from relevant studies were analyzed using the Mantel-Haenszel method with a random-effects model for younger vs older patients. Specific complication rates were compared between the two cohorts using a chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Of the 4448 studies retrieved, 25 studies stratified complication data by age groups. From these studies, ten studies compared groups at ages < 18 and ≥ 18 and four studies compared ages < 20 and ≥ 20, and one study compared ages < 19 and ≥ 19. These fifteen studies reported on 5978 patients, with 1188 complications, for a complication rate of 19.87%. Older patients were more likely to have complications in a pooled analysis of studies comparing older vs younger patients (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.28-2.14, heterogeneity I² = 49%). Specifically, older patients were significantly more likely to experience pneumothorax, pleural effusion, wound infection, bar displacement, and reoperations.

CONCLUSION

Increased age is a risk factor for complications of MIRPE. This supports repair of pectus excavatum prior to late adolescence.

Pectus bar removal - why, when, where and how

OBJECTIVE

Despite its less invasive nature, the widespread use of the minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) procedure has been associated with a significant number of serious complications. On the other hand, Pectus bar removal (PBR) is often considered a simple procedure and often scheduled in an outpatient setting. However, several studies report near-fatal complications not only during bar placement, but also during bar removal. The aim of our study was to clarify why a pectus bar should be removed, timing for removal, where PBR should be performed, and overall setup for safe removal.

METHODS

A comprehensive review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching for articles published since 1998 in English. "Pectus bar removal AND (near-fatal) complications" were the applied terms. Inclusion criteria were articles reporting on the focus of PBR after MIRPE. Eligible study designs included (retrospective) case study series, case report and reviews. Full-text articles in which the technique in general was described were omitted.

RESULTS

Recently published results of an online survey raised awareness about type and number of possible complications during PBR. Furthermore, our comprehensive literature review identified only a few, but serious complications during PBR.

CONCLUSIONS

PBR has a high safety profile but in rare cases may be associated with major complications such as life-threatening hemorrhage from various thoracic sources. This risk is higher in patients with a history of complex MIPRE. In an effort to decrease these complications we recommend bilateral opening of surgical incisions, unbending the bar and meticulous mobilization of the bar. To manage these complications if they occur, we recommend removal in a hospital setting with adequate resources and personal including cardiac surgeons. If the postoperative course is uneventful discharge on the same day is reasonable.