Pectus Bar Dislocation: Comparison Between Three Different Stabilization Techniques Adopted in a Single Centre
Francesco Donati1, Maria Stella Cipriani1, Angela Pistorio2
1Pediatric Surgery Department, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Largo Gaslini 5, 16147 Genoa, Italy.
Background:
Bar dislocation has always been considered a fearsome complication of Minimally Invasive Repair of Pectus Excavatum (MIRPE), therefore multiple techniques and types of stabilization have been introduced. The aim of the study is to compare different stabilization techniques in a cohort of patients operated by the same first operator.
Methods:
MIRPE was adopted at our institution in 2005. Data on MIRPE patients from January 2013 to December 2022 were collected prospectively and reviewed. Patients with a follow-up of at least 12 months were included. Throughout the years different ways of stabilization were used. Patients were divided in 3 groups according to the stabilization strategy adopted- Group A: no stabilizer; Group B: single bar fixation; Group C: bridge fixation. Dislocation was diagnosed if a bar rotated more than 30° or displaced laterally for more than 1.5 cm. We compared bar dislocation percentage of each group.
Results:
We positioned 733 bars in 468 patients. Group A included 113 bars (15.4%), Group B 415 bars (56.6%), Group C 205 bars (28%). No patients were lost at follow-up. Total dislocation rate was 4.1% (30 bars). Dislocation was observed in 10 bars of group A (8.8%), 20 bars of group B (4.8 %), 0 bars of group C (0%). Differences between groups were statistically significant.
Conclusions:
The use of stabilizers reduced dislocation percentage. In particular, bridge fixation technique reduced to zero bar dislocation and is now our preferred technique of stabilization.
Level Of Evidence:
III.
