Evolution of Pain Control for Adult Pectus Excavatum Repair.

BACKGROUND: Pain control after minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) can be challenging, especially in adult patients undergoing surgical repair. This study reviewed different analgesic modalities used over ≥10 years after pectus repair. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent uncomplicated primary MIRPE at a single institution from October 2010 to December 2021. Patients were classified by analgesic modality used: epidural, elastomeric continuous infusion subcutaneous catheters (SC-Caths), and intercostal nerve cryoablation. Comparisons among the 3 groups were performed. RESULTS: In total, 729 patients were included (mean age, 30.9 ±10.3 years; 67% male; mean Haller index, 4.9 ±3.0). Patients in the cryoablation group required significantly lower doses of morphine equivalents (P < .001) and had overall the shortest hospital stay (mean, 1.9 ±1.5 days; P < .001) with <17% staying >2 days (vs epidural at 94% and SC-Cath at 48%; P < .001). The cryoablation group had a lower incidence of ileus and constipation (P < .001) but a higher incidence of pleural effusion requiring thoracentesis (P = .024). Mean pain scores among groups were minor (<3), and differences were insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of cryoablation in conjunction with enhanced recovery pathways provided significant benefit to our patients undergoing MIRPE compared with previous analgesic modalities. These benefits included a decrease in length of hospital stay, a reduction of in-hospital opioid use, and a lower incidence of opioid-related complications associated with constipation and ileus. Further studies to assess additional potential benefits with long-term follow-up after discharge are warranted.

Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum in adults: a review article of presentation, workup, and surgical treatment.

Pectus excavatum (Pex) is one of the most common congenital deformities of the chest wall, with pectus constituting 90% of all chest wall deformities and excavatum being reported in almost 1:400 to 1:1,000 live births with predominant occurrence in males up to five times more than in females. Depending on the severity, presentation varies from mild cosmetic complaints to life limiting cardiopulmonary symptoms. Patients may develop symptoms as they age, and these symptoms may worsen over the years. A technique for minimally invasive repair for pectus excavatum (MIRPE) was introduced with the concept of temporarily implanting metal bars to correct the deformity. This has rapidly become the standard of care for the pediatric and adolescent patients. The use of MIRPE in adults, however, has been slower to adopt and more controversial. This is largely due to the increased calcification and rigidity of the chest wall in adults which can make the repair more complex and lead to a higher risk of complications. We present a literature review of the presentation, workup, and surgical treatment of adult patients with Pex undergoing MIRPE. Adult patients can, with advanced preoperative evaluations and technique modifications, undergo a highly successful repair resulting in symptom resolution and satisfying results.

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.