Quality of life outcomes after minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum utilizing a new set of metallic bars and stabilizers
jpedsurg.org shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on jpedsurg.org ↗Article · Jul 2020 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
Prospective randomized trial comparing newly designed oblique bar stabilizers versus standard perpendicular stabilizers in 30 MIRPE patients demonstrates significant improvements in body image and psychosocial scores at 6 months postoperatively. Patients with new stabilizer design showed enhanced physical function outcomes, suggesting non-inferior results with potential advantages over conventional hardware.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
Abstract
Background/Purpose
The aim of the study was to evaluate the postoperative quality of life (QoL) of patients who underwent minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) with a newly designed bar and bar stabilizers.
Methods
We conducted a prospective randomized study in which patients were operated either with standard perpendicular stabilizers (control group) or with the newly designed oblique stabilizers (intervention group). All patients were evaluated 6 months after the operation with the Pectus Excavatum Evaluation Questionnaire (PEEQ).
Results
There were 16 patients in the control group and 14 in the intervention group. Mean age was 17 (SD: 3.3, range 14–27) years. There were no demographic differences between groups. Two patients in the control group and one in the intervention group were repaired with two bars instead of one. There was one reoperation in each group. There was a significant difference between the pre- and postoperative scores, in both groups, in the patient body image domain (control group: 9.5 to 3; p < 0.01; intervention group 10 to 3; p < 0.01), as well as in the psychosocial domain (control group: 13.5 to 24, p < 0.01; intervention group: 15 to 24, p < 0.01). With regards to the patients' perception of physical difficulties before and after MIRPE, the difference between pre- and postoperative scores was greater in the intervention group (8 to 12, p < 0.01) than in the control group (10 to 11, p = 0.04). The mean length of stay was 4.5 and 5 days in the intervention group and the control group, respectively.
Conclusion
Our study showed that patients who underwent MIRPE with the newly designed bars and stabilizers had non-inferior outcomes than patients reported in the literature who underwent MIRPE with standard bars and stabilizers. We found slightly better outcomes in patients in the intervention group compared to the control group, but larger studies will be needed to confirm if those differences are statistically significant.
Level of evidence
II