A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum in patients with Marfan syndrome and marfanoid features. | LitMetric

Purpose: The presence of a pectus excavatum (PE) requiring surgical repair is a major skeletal feature of Marfan syndrome. Marfanoid patients have phenotypic findings but do not meet all diagnostic criteria. We sought to examine the clinical and management differences between Marfan syndrome patients and those who are marfanoid compared with all other patients undergoing minimally invasive PE repair.

Methods: A retrospective institutional review board-approved review was conducted of a prospectively gathered database of all patients who underwent minimally invasive repair of PE. Patients were grouped according to diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MAR), Marfanoid appearance (OID), and all others (ALL). Patient demographics, preoperative imaging and testing, operative strategy, complications, and postoperative surveys were evaluated. Fisher's Exact test and chi(2) were applied for statistical analysis.

Results: From June 1987 to September 2008, 1192 patients underwent minimally invasive PE repair (MAR = 33, OID = 212, ALL = 947). There was a significantly higher proportion of females with either MAR or OID who underwent repair (21.5%vs 15.5%, P = .04). The MAR patients had significantly more severe PE determined by computed tomography index (MAR = 8.75, OID = 5.82, ALL = 4.94, P < .0001) and required multiple pectus bars (> or =2) to be placed during operation (MAR = 58%, OID = 36%, ALL = 29%, P = .001). There was a trend toward higher wound infection rates in MAR patients (MAR = 6%, OID = 1.4%, ALL = 1.3%, P = .07). The recurrence rate was similar among all groups (MAR = 0%, OID = 2%, ALL = 0.7%, P = .12). Successful outcome from surgeon perspective in either MAR or OID patients was similar to ALL (98%vs 98%, P = .88) and correlated well with patient satisfaction after repair (96%vs 95%, P = .43).

Conclusions: Minimally invasive PE repair is safe in patients with Marfan syndrome or marfanoid features with equally good results. Patients with Marfan syndrome have clinically more severe PE requiring multiple bars for chest repair and may have slightly higher wound infection rates. Patients are satisfied with minimally invasive repair despite a phenotypically more severe chest wall defect.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.10.037DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

minimally invasive
24
marfan syndrome
24
invasive repair
20
mar oid
20
patients
13
patients marfan
12
syndrome marfanoid
12
mar
10
repair
9
pectus excavatum
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!