Advertisement

Pediatric Surgery International

, Volume 34, Issue 7, pp 775–780 | Cite as

Minimal cosmetic revision required after minimally invasive pectus repair

  • Brittany L. Murphy
  • Nimesh D. Naik
  • Penny L. Roskos
  • Amy E. Glasgow
  • Christopher R. Moir
  • Elizabeth B. Habermann
  • Denise B. Klinkner
Original Article
  • 20 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Despite surgical correction procedures for pectus deformities, remaining cosmetic asymmetry may have significant psychological effects. We sought to evaluate factors associated with plastic surgery (PS) consultation and procedures for these deformities at an academic institution.

Methods

We reviewed patients aged 0–21 diagnosed with a pectus excavatum or carinatum deformity at our institution between January 2001 and October 2016. Pectus diagnoses were identified by ICD-9/ICD-10 codes and surgical repair by CPT codes; patients receiving PS consultation were identified by clinical note service codes. Student’s t tests, Fisher’s exact tests, and Chi-squared tests were utilized.

Results

2158 patients were diagnosed with a pectus deformity; 442 (20.4%) underwent surgical correction. 19/442 (4.3%) sought PS consultation, either for pectus excavatum [14/19 (73.7%)], carinatum [4/19 (21.0%)], and both [1/19 (5.3%)], (p = 0.02). Patients seeking PS consultation were more likely to be female (p < 0.01), have scoliosis (p = 0.02), or undergo an open repair (p < 0.01). The need for PS consultation did not correlate with Haller index, p = 0.78.

Conclusion

PS consultation associated with pectus deformity repair was rare, occurring in < 5% of patients undergoing repair. Patients who consulted PS more commonly included females, patients with scoliosis, and those undergoing open repair. These patients would likely benefit most from multidisciplinary pre-operative discussions regarding repair of the global deformity.

Keywords

Pectus deformity Residual deformity Plastic surgery Multidisciplinary 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Mayo Clinic Departments of Pediatric Surgery, Surgery, and the Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery as substantial contributors of resources to the project.

Funding

The Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery provides salary support for Dr. Habermann and Ms. Glasgow. No external funding was used.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors disclose no conflicts.

Supplementary material

383_2018_4275_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Appendix 1: International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9, ICD-10, and Current Procedural Terminology Diagnosis and Procedure Codes Used for Patient Identification (DOCX 15 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Brochhausen C, Turial S, Muller FK et al (2012) Pectus excavatum: history, hypotheses and treatment options. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 14:801–806CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chung CS, Myrianthopoulos NC (1975) Factors affecting risks of congenital malformations. I. Analysis of epidemiologic factors in congenital malformations. Report from the Collaborative Perinatal Project. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser 11:1–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goretsky MJ, Kelly RE Jr, Croitoru D et al (2004) Chest wall anomalies: pectus excavatum and pectus carinatum. Adolesc Med Clin 15:455–471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson JN, Hartman TK, Pianosi PT et al (2008) Cardiorespiratory function after operation for pectus excavatum. J Pediatrics 153:359–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dean C, Etienne D, Hindson D et al (2012) Pectus excavatum (funnel chest): a historical and current prospective. Surg Radiol Anat 34:573–579CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chavoin JP, Grolleau JL, Moreno B et al (2016) Correction of pectus excavatum by custom-made silicone implants: contribution of computer-aided design reconstruction. A 20-year experience and 401 cases. Plastic Reconstr Surg 137:860e-871eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fonkalsrud EW (2004) Management of pectus chest deformities in female patients. Am J Surg 187:192–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lam MW, Klassen AF, Montgomery CJ et al (2008) Quality-of-life outcomes after surgical correction of pectus excavatum: a comparison of the Ravitch and Nuss procedures. J Pediatric Surg 43:819–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roberts J, Hayashi A, Anderson JO et al (2003) Quality of life of patients who have undergone the Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum: preliminary findings. J Pediatric Surg 38:779–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chaput B, Taizou M, Grolleau JL et al (2016) Custom-Made Silicone Implants for Pectus excavatum correction: The end of remodeling thoracic surgery? Plastic Reconstr Surg 139(1):323e–324eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Soccorso G, Parikh DH, Worrollo S (2015) Customized silicone implant for the correction of acquired and congenital chest wall deformities: a valuable option with pectus excavatum. J Pediatric Surg 50:1232–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ciurea M, Ulmeanu D, Popa D et al (2014) Pure pectus carinatum (not associated with pectus excavatum) solved by MIRPC (minimally invasive repair of pectus carinatum) associated with bilateral mamarian hypoplasia solved by bilateral breast implants. Chirurgia (Bucur) 109:136–138Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rha EY, Kim JM, Yoo G et al (2016) Is breast asymmetry caused by volume differences in women with pectus excavatum? Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery. JPRAS 69:470–474PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park HJ, Gu JH, Jang JC et al (2014) Correction of pectus excavatum with breast hypoplasia using simultaneous pectus bar procedure and augmentation mammoplasty. Ann Plastic Surg 73:190–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho Quoc C, Delaporte T, Meruta A et al (2013) Breast asymmetry and pectus excavatum improvement with fat grafting. Aesthet Surg J 33:822–829CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beier JP, Weber PG, Reingruber B et al (2009) Aesthetic and functional correction of female, asymmetric funnel chest—a combined approach. Breast 18:60–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Horch RE, Stoelben E, Carbon R et al (2006) Pectus excavatum breast and chest deformity: indications for aesthetic plastic surgery versus thoracic surgery in a multicenter experience. Aesthet Plastic Surg 30:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nuss D, Kelly RE Jr, Croitoru DP et al (1998) A 10-year review of a minimally invasive technique for the correction of pectus excavatum. J Pediatric Surg 33:545–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hanna WC, Ko MA, Blitz M et al (2013) Thoracoscopic Nuss procedure for young adults with pectus excavatum: excellent midterm results and patient satisfaction. Ann Thorac Surg 96:1033–1036 (discussion 1037–1038) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hadolt B, Wallisch A, Egger JW et al (2011) Body-image, self-concept and mental exposure in patients with pectus excavatum. Pediatric Surg Int 27:665–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ma IT, Rebecca AM, Notrica DM et al (2015) Pectus excavatum in adult women: repair and the impact of prior or concurrent breast augmentation. Plastic Reconstr Surg 135:303e-312eCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brittany L. Murphy
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nimesh D. Naik
    • 1
  • Penny L. Roskos
    • 3
  • Amy E. Glasgow
    • 2
  • Christopher R. Moir
    • 3
  • Elizabeth B. Habermann
    • 2
  • Denise B. Klinkner
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  2. 2.The Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes ProgramMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  3. 3.Division of Pediatric SurgeryMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations