Comparison of the Nuss and the Ravitch procedure for pectus excavatum repair: a meta-analysis
Abstract Purpose Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ra...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of pediatric surgery Vol. 45; no. 5; pp. 880 - 886 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Elsevier Inc
01.05.2010
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Abstract Purpose Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ravitch procedure using systematic review and meta-analysis methodology. Methods All publications describing both interventions were sought through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5 software. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals are presented. Results No randomized trials were identified. Nine prospective and retrospective studies were identified and were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates between both techniques (OR, 1.75 (0.62-4.95); P = .30). Looking at specific complications, the rate of reoperation because of bar migration or persistent deformity was significantly higher in the Nuss group (OR, 5.68 (2.51-12.85); P = .0001). Also, postoperative pneumothorax and hemothorax were higher in the Nuss group (OR, 6.06 [1.57-23.48]; P = .009 and OR, 5.60 [1.00-31.33]; P = .05), respectively. Duration of surgery was longer with the Ravitch (WMD, 69.94 minutes (0.83-139.04); P = .05). There was no difference in length of hospital stay (WMD, 0.4 days (−2.05 to 2.86); P = .75) or time to ambulation after surgery (WMD, 0.33 days [−0.89 to 0.23]; P = .24). Among studies looking at patient satisfaction, there was no difference between both techniques. Conclusions Our results suggest no differences between the Nuss procedure vs the Ravitch procedure with respect to overall complications, length of hospital stay, and time to ambulation. However, the rate of reoperation, postoperative hemothorax, and pneumothorax after the Nuss procedure were higher compared to the Ravitch procedure. No studies showed a difference in patient satisfaction. |
---|---|
AbstractList | PURPOSEPectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied-the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ravitch procedure using systematic review and meta-analysis methodology.METHODSAll publications describing both interventions were sought through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5 software. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals are presented.RESULTSNo randomized trials were identified. Nine prospective and retrospective studies were identified and were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates between both techniques (OR, 1.75 (0.62-4.95); P = .30). Looking at specific complications, the rate of reoperation because of bar migration or persistent deformity was significantly higher in the Nuss group (OR, 5.68 (2.51-12.85); P = .0001). Also, postoperative pneumothorax and hemothorax were higher in the Nuss group (OR, 6.06 [1.57-23.48]; P = .009 and OR, 5.60 [1.00-31.33]; P = .05), respectively. Duration of surgery was longer with the Ravitch (WMD, 69.94 minutes (0.83-139.04); P = .05). There was no difference in length of hospital stay (WMD, 0.4 days (-2.05 to 2.86); P = .75) or time to ambulation after surgery (WMD, 0.33 days [-0.89 to 0.23]; P = .24). Among studies looking at patient satisfaction, there was no difference between both techniques.CONCLUSIONSOur results suggest no differences between the Nuss procedure vs the Ravitch procedure with respect to overall complications, length of hospital stay, and time to ambulation. However, the rate of reoperation, postoperative hemothorax, and pneumothorax after the Nuss procedure were higher compared to the Ravitch procedure. No studies showed a difference in patient satisfaction. Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ravitch procedure using systematic review and meta-analysis methodology. All publications describing both interventions were sought through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5 software. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals are presented. No randomized trials were identified. Nine prospective and retrospective studies were identified and were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates between both techniques (OR, 1.75 (0.62-4.95); P = .30). Looking at specific complications, the rate of reoperation because of bar migration or persistent deformity was significantly higher in the Nuss group (OR, 5.68 (2.51-12.85); P = .0001). Also, postoperative pneumothorax and hemothorax were higher in the Nuss group (OR, 6.06 [1.57-23.48]; P = .009 and OR, 5.60 [1.00-31.33]; P = .05), respectively. Duration of surgery was longer with the Ravitch (WMD, 69.94 minutes (0.83-139.04); P = .05). There was no difference in length of hospital stay (WMD, 0.4 days (−2.05 to 2.86); P = .75) or time to ambulation after surgery (WMD, 0.33 days [−0.89 to 0.23]; P = .24). Among studies looking at patient satisfaction, there was no difference between both techniques. Our results suggest no differences between the Nuss procedure vs the Ravitch procedure with respect to overall complications, length of hospital stay, and time to ambulation. However, the rate of reoperation, postoperative hemothorax, and pneumothorax after the Nuss procedure were higher compared to the Ravitch procedure. No studies showed a difference in patient satisfaction. Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied-the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ravitch procedure using systematic review and meta-analysis methodology. All publications describing both interventions were sought through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5 software. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals are presented. No randomized trials were identified. Nine prospective and retrospective studies were identified and were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates between both techniques (OR, 1.75 (0.62-4.95); P = .30). Looking at specific complications, the rate of reoperation because of bar migration or persistent deformity was significantly higher in the Nuss group (OR, 5.68 (2.51-12.85); P = .0001). Also, postoperative pneumothorax and hemothorax were higher in the Nuss group (OR, 6.06 [1.57-23.48]; P = .009 and OR, 5.60 [1.00-31.33]; P = .05), respectively. Duration of surgery was longer with the Ravitch (WMD, 69.94 minutes (0.83-139.04); P = .05). There was no difference in length of hospital stay (WMD, 0.4 days (-2.05 to 2.86); P = .75) or time to ambulation after surgery (WMD, 0.33 days [-0.89 to 0.23]; P = .24). Among studies looking at patient satisfaction, there was no difference between both techniques. Our results suggest no differences between the Nuss procedure vs the Ravitch procedure with respect to overall complications, length of hospital stay, and time to ambulation. However, the rate of reoperation, postoperative hemothorax, and pneumothorax after the Nuss procedure were higher compared to the Ravitch procedure. No studies showed a difference in patient satisfaction. Abstract Purpose Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies are published evaluating both procedures with inconsistent results. Our objective was to compare the Nuss procedure to the Ravitch procedure using systematic review and meta-analysis methodology. Methods All publications describing both interventions were sought through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5 software. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals are presented. Results No randomized trials were identified. Nine prospective and retrospective studies were identified and were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates between both techniques (OR, 1.75 (0.62-4.95); P = .30). Looking at specific complications, the rate of reoperation because of bar migration or persistent deformity was significantly higher in the Nuss group (OR, 5.68 (2.51-12.85); P = .0001). Also, postoperative pneumothorax and hemothorax were higher in the Nuss group (OR, 6.06 [1.57-23.48]; P = .009 and OR, 5.60 [1.00-31.33]; P = .05), respectively. Duration of surgery was longer with the Ravitch (WMD, 69.94 minutes (0.83-139.04); P = .05). There was no difference in length of hospital stay (WMD, 0.4 days (−2.05 to 2.86); P = .75) or time to ambulation after surgery (WMD, 0.33 days [−0.89 to 0.23]; P = .24). Among studies looking at patient satisfaction, there was no difference between both techniques. Conclusions Our results suggest no differences between the Nuss procedure vs the Ravitch procedure with respect to overall complications, length of hospital stay, and time to ambulation. However, the rate of reoperation, postoperative hemothorax, and pneumothorax after the Nuss procedure were higher compared to the Ravitch procedure. No studies showed a difference in patient satisfaction. |
Author | Fecteau, Annie Wales, Paul W Nasr, Ahmed |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 fullname: Nasr, Ahmed – sequence: 2 fullname: Fecteau, Annie – sequence: 3 fullname: Wales, Paul W |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20438918$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNqFkUuP0zAUhS00iOkU_sLIO1Yp148mLgsEqnhJI5B4LJHl2teMQxIHO6nov8ehMyzYsLJ8dc59fOeKXAxxQEKuGWwYsPpZu2lHdHlO3zccShH4Bhh_QFZsK1i1BdFckBUA55WQtbokVzm3AKUM7BG55CCF2jG1It_2sR9NCjkONHo63SL9MOdMzeD-fD6ZY5jsLR1TtOjmhNTHREe005wp_rLmaKa5pwlHE9JzamiPk6nMYLpTDvkxeehNl_HJ3bsmX9-8_rJ_V918fPt-_-qmslKpqRLesQah3jpl-EE25gCycdLVyMFLYe3WK1Ro6kbwHXgHXihR28Z7ppiQKNbk6blvWfPnjHnSfcgWu84MGOesGyF2UixXr0l9VtoUc07o9ZhCb9JJM9ALWd3qe7J6IauB60K2GK_vRsyHHt1f2z3KInh5FmA59Bgw6WwDDoVaSAWXdjH8f8aLf1rYLgzBmu4HnjC3cU4FbNZM52LQn5d8l3hZSZaBZOI3OqikpQ |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2016_05_079 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivt250 crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2021_0216 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivs045 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2013_11_058 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2021_10_030 crossref_primary_10_1177_1553350613506299 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2012_10_016 crossref_primary_10_1308_rcsann_2016_0254 crossref_primary_10_1177_0218492315625160 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00595_020_02020_8 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2016_12_029 crossref_primary_10_1097_JCMA_0000000000001054 crossref_primary_10_1111_1744_1633_12017 crossref_primary_10_1177_0218492316657243 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jss_2019_06_069 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2023_01_040 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0175213 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2017_05_028 crossref_primary_10_3103_S106287381604016X crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2011_0035 crossref_primary_10_32414_0869_8678_2015_4_5_9 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_yapd_2014_03_011 crossref_primary_10_17816_vto20152245_9 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_xjtc_2022_02_003 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2018_05_025 crossref_primary_10_1016_S1245_1789_14_68102_6 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2021_03_006 crossref_primary_10_1002_14651858_CD008889_pub2 crossref_primary_10_4081_pr_2013_e15 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2013_02_025 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2013_02_024 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00383_017_4148_6 crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2012_0009 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph191811291 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jtcvs_2011_02_030 crossref_primary_10_1590_0100_69912014006004 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2014_09_014 crossref_primary_10_1111_jocs_12559 crossref_primary_10_1186_1749_8090_9_25 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00383_015_3694_z crossref_primary_10_1016_j_atssr_2023_06_005 crossref_primary_10_1097_PRS_0000000000002071 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jtcvs_2014_01_014 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2017_09_031 crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2017_0665 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2020_02_053 crossref_primary_10_1097_PRS_0b013e3182a97dc1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00276_012_0938_7 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2015_10_037 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivw263 crossref_primary_10_1097_GOX_0000000000002378 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivu083 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2013_04_093 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejcts_2011_06_022 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmjresp_2023_001665 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2019_12_012 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2013_08_016 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jsurg_2019_07_020 crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2020_0312 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2022_04_022 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2014_01_025 crossref_primary_10_1111_pan_14838 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2021_12_051 crossref_primary_10_3389_fped_2022_831617 crossref_primary_10_1080_16864360_2017_1375676 crossref_primary_10_1542_peds_2016_1485 crossref_primary_10_1089_lap_2017_0699 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2016_09_034 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13019_017_0635_z crossref_primary_10_1007_s00383_015_3764_2 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20150595 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivy294 crossref_primary_10_4236_ojped_2013_33038 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00508_017_1214_y crossref_primary_10_1007_s00383_017_4195_z crossref_primary_10_1016_j_athoracsur_2012_11_007 crossref_primary_10_1093_ejcts_ezs392 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpp_2016_01_004 crossref_primary_10_1093_icvts_ivt555 crossref_primary_10_1111_ases_12263 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/S0022-3468(98)90314-1 10.3346/jkms.2003.18.3.360 10.1097/01.PRS.0000130938.87402.B0 10.1542/peds.2007-2723 10.1053/jpsu.2002.30852 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.12.020 10.1053/jpsu.2001.20707 10.1067/msy.2001.116917 10.1097/00000658-194904000-00002 10.1007/s00464-002-8767-0 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.017 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Elsevier Inc. 2010 Elsevier Inc. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Elsevier Inc. – notice: 2010 Elsevier Inc. – notice: Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM AAYXX CITATION 7X8 |
DOI | 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1531-5037 |
EndPage | 886 |
ExternalDocumentID | 10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2010_02_012 20438918 S0022346810001041 1_s2_0_S0022346810001041 |
Genre | Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | --- --K --M .1- .55 .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 1B1 1P~ 1RT 1~. 1~5 3O- 4.4 457 4CK 4G. 53G 5GY 5RE 5VS 7-5 71M 8P~ 9JM AABNK AACTN AAEDT AAEDW AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQOH AAQQT AAQXK AAXKI AAXUO ABBQC ABFNM ABFRF ABJNI ABLJU ABMAC ABMZM ABOCM ABPPZ ABXDB ACDAQ ACGFO ACGFS ACRLP ADBBV ADEZE ADMUD AEBSH AEFWE AEKER AENEX AEVXI AFCTW AFFNX AFJKZ AFKWA AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGHFR AGUBO AGYEJ AHHHB AIEXJ AIKHN AITUG AJOXV AJRQY AJUYK AKRWK ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMFUW AMRAJ ANZVX ASPBG AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV CAG COF CS3 DU5 EBS EFJIC EJD EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN G-2 G-Q GBLVA HEF HMK HMO HVGLF HZ~ IHE J1W K-O KOM L7B M29 M32 M41 MO0 N4W N9A O-L O9- OAUVE OK- OW- OZT P-8 P-9 P2P PC. Q38 R2- RIG ROL RPZ SAE SDF SDG SDP SEL SES SEW SJN SPCBC SSH SSZ T5K UGJ UHS UV1 WUQ X7M Z5R ZGI ~G- AAIAV ABLVK ABYKQ AHPSJ AJBFU EFLBG LCYCR ZA5 CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM AAYXX ACRPL ADNMO CITATION 7X8 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-3fd17e065d8a2b47ab047d4d6e20f43cc5f8e8ea673290fd0f3836c7ff18134e3 |
IEDL.DBID | AIKHN |
ISSN | 0022-3468 |
IngestDate | Fri Oct 25 09:47:05 EDT 2024 Fri Dec 06 05:19:13 EST 2024 Sat Sep 28 08:12:35 EDT 2024 Fri Feb 23 02:26:58 EST 2024 Tue Oct 15 22:53:58 EDT 2024 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 5 |
Keywords | Nuss repair Pectus excavatum Ravitch repair |
Language | English |
License | Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0 |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c488t-3fd17e065d8a2b47ab047d4d6e20f43cc5f8e8ea673290fd0f3836c7ff18134e3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 ObjectType-Review-4 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
PMID | 20438918 |
PQID | 733943204 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 7 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_733943204 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2010_02_012 pubmed_primary_20438918 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2010_02_012 elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0022346810001041 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2010-05-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2010-05-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 05 year: 2010 text: 2010-05-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | Journal of pediatric surgery |
PublicationTitleAlternate | J Pediatr Surg |
PublicationYear | 2010 |
Publisher | Elsevier Inc |
Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier Inc |
References | Kelly, Cash, Shamberger (bib11) 2008; 122 Antonoff, Erickson, Hess (bib7) 2009; 44 Boehm, Muensterer, Till (bib6) 2004; 114 Molik, Engum, Rescorla (bib10) 2001; 36 Nuss, Kelly (bib2) 1998; 33 Inge, Owings, Blewett (bib8) 2003; 17 Lam, Klassen, Montgomery (bib9) 2008; 43 Jo, Choi, Sohn (bib3) 2003; 18 Ravitch (bib1) 1949; 129 Fonkalsrud, Beanes, Hebra (bib5) 2002; 37 Miller, Woods, Sharp (bib4) 2001; 130 Nuss (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib2) 1998; 33 Antonoff (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib7) 2009; 44 Boehm (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib6) 2004; 114 Miller (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib4) 2001; 130 Lam (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib9) 2008; 43 Kelly (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib11) 2008; 122 Inge (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib8) 2003; 17 Ravitch (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib1) 1949; 129 Jo (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib3) 2003; 18 Molik (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib10) 2001; 36 Fonkalsrud (10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib5) 2002; 37 |
References_xml | – volume: 36 start-page: 324 year: 2001 end-page: 328 ident: bib10 article-title: Pectus excavatum repair: experience with standard and minimal invasive techniques publication-title: J Pediatr Surg contributor: fullname: Rescorla – volume: 37 start-page: 413 year: 2002 end-page: 417 ident: bib5 article-title: Comparison of minimally invasive and modified Ravitch pectus excavatum repair publication-title: J Pediatr Surg contributor: fullname: Hebra – volume: 43 start-page: 819 year: 2008 end-page: 825 ident: bib9 article-title: Quality-of-life outcomes after surgical correction of pectus excavatum: a comparison of the Ravitch and Nuss procedures publication-title: J Pediatr Surg contributor: fullname: Montgomery – volume: 44 start-page: 1113 year: 2009 end-page: 1118 ident: bib7 article-title: When patients choose: comparison of Nuss, Ravitch, and Leonard procedures for primary repair of pectus excavatum publication-title: J Pediatr Surg contributor: fullname: Hess – volume: 129 start-page: 429 year: 1949 end-page: 444 ident: bib1 article-title: The operative treatment of pectus excavatum publication-title: Ann Surg contributor: fullname: Ravitch – volume: 122 start-page: 1218 year: 2008 end-page: 1222 ident: bib11 article-title: Surgical repair of pectus excavatum markedly improves body image and perceived ability for physical activity: multicenter study publication-title: Pediatrics contributor: fullname: Shamberger – volume: 33 start-page: 545 year: 1998 end-page: 555 ident: bib2 article-title: A 10-year review of a minimally invasive technique for the correction of pectus excavatum publication-title: J Pediatr Surg contributor: fullname: Kelly – volume: 18 start-page: 360 year: 2003 end-page: 364 ident: bib3 article-title: Surgical treatment for pectus excavatum publication-title: J Korean Med Sci contributor: fullname: Sohn – volume: 130 start-page: 652 year: 2001 end-page: 657 ident: bib4 article-title: Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum: a single institution's experience publication-title: Surgery contributor: fullname: Sharp – volume: 114 start-page: 668 year: 2004 end-page: 673 ident: bib6 article-title: Comparing minimally invasive funnel chest repair versus the conventional technique: an outcome analysis in children publication-title: Plast Reconstr Surg contributor: fullname: Till – volume: 17 start-page: 1609 year: 2003 end-page: 1613 ident: bib8 article-title: Reduced hospitalization cost for patients with pectus excavatum treated using minimally invasive surgery publication-title: Surg Endosc contributor: fullname: Blewett – volume: 33 start-page: 545 year: 1998 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib2 article-title: A 10-year review of a minimally invasive technique for the correction of pectus excavatum publication-title: J Pediatr Surg doi: 10.1016/S0022-3468(98)90314-1 contributor: fullname: Nuss – volume: 18 start-page: 360 year: 2003 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib3 article-title: Surgical treatment for pectus excavatum publication-title: J Korean Med Sci doi: 10.3346/jkms.2003.18.3.360 contributor: fullname: Jo – volume: 114 start-page: 668 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib6 article-title: Comparing minimally invasive funnel chest repair versus the conventional technique: an outcome analysis in children publication-title: Plast Reconstr Surg doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000130938.87402.B0 contributor: fullname: Boehm – volume: 122 start-page: 1218 year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib11 article-title: Surgical repair of pectus excavatum markedly improves body image and perceived ability for physical activity: multicenter study publication-title: Pediatrics doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-2723 contributor: fullname: Kelly – volume: 37 start-page: 413 year: 2002 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib5 article-title: Comparison of minimally invasive and modified Ravitch pectus excavatum repair publication-title: J Pediatr Surg doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2002.30852 contributor: fullname: Fonkalsrud – volume: 43 start-page: 819 year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib9 article-title: Quality-of-life outcomes after surgical correction of pectus excavatum: a comparison of the Ravitch and Nuss procedures publication-title: J Pediatr Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.12.020 contributor: fullname: Lam – volume: 36 start-page: 324 year: 2001 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib10 article-title: Pectus excavatum repair: experience with standard and minimal invasive techniques publication-title: J Pediatr Surg doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2001.20707 contributor: fullname: Molik – volume: 130 start-page: 652 year: 2001 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib4 article-title: Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum: a single institution's experience publication-title: Surgery doi: 10.1067/msy.2001.116917 contributor: fullname: Miller – volume: 129 start-page: 429 year: 1949 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib1 article-title: The operative treatment of pectus excavatum publication-title: Ann Surg doi: 10.1097/00000658-194904000-00002 contributor: fullname: Ravitch – volume: 17 start-page: 1609 year: 2003 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib8 article-title: Reduced hospitalization cost for patients with pectus excavatum treated using minimally invasive surgery publication-title: Surg Endosc doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8767-0 contributor: fullname: Inge – volume: 44 start-page: 1113 year: 2009 ident: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012_bib7 article-title: When patients choose: comparison of Nuss, Ravitch, and Leonard procedures for primary repair of pectus excavatum publication-title: J Pediatr Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.017 contributor: fullname: Antonoff |
SSID | ssj0003701 |
Score | 2.3151536 |
SecondaryResourceType | review_article |
Snippet | Abstract Purpose Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several... Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied—the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies... Pectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied-the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative studies... PURPOSEPectus excavatum is the most common chest wall deformity in children. Two procedures are widely applied-the Nuss and the Ravitch. Several comparative... |
SourceID | proquest crossref pubmed elsevier |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 880 |
SubjectTerms | Funnel Chest - surgery Humans Infant, Newborn Nuss repair Pain, Postoperative - prevention & control Pectus excavatum Pediatrics Ravitch repair Surgery Thoracic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects Thoracic Surgical Procedures - methods Thoracic Surgical Procedures - rehabilitation Time Factors Treatment Outcome |
Title | Comparison of the Nuss and the Ravitch procedure for pectus excavatum repair: a meta-analysis |
URI | https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0022346810001041 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.012 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20438918 https://search.proquest.com/docview/733943204 |
Volume | 45 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Na9wwEBVpAqGX0qZJs20adMjVu5IlW3ZuYUnYdskeQkNzCULWR9mFeBd_hJ762zPyyqalhBxyMjYWsmekeU9o3gihM1iYJCIXJjKauMhXpIpUniSRKBzgZ6qTpPBC4etFOrvl3--Sux007bUwPq0yxP5tTO-idXgyCdacbJZLr_EFaOO-nlZXZAaWQHsAR36vdu_i23y2GAIyE4QORcOhwV9C4dV4tbGmbqtfIcsrHhMaP4dRz3HQDouu3qN3gUTii-13fkA7tjxA-9dhm_wjup8OpwvitcPA8fCirWusStPd3KjHJXgLd-hl2spioK7Yay7bGtvfWj2qpn3AFUDVsjrHCj_YRkUq1C85RLdXlz-msyicoxBpmJ5NxJyhwgLXMJmKCy5UQbgw3KQ2Jo4zrROX2cyqVLA4J84QB8vWVAvnAP4Zt-wI7Zbr0h4jzKlwliXU8SLjQN6AzGhSMKa8ojbT-QhNesvJzbZchuzzyFayt7X0tpYklmDrERK9gWUvBoXwZeswl2pJZQ1vyv_8PUL50PKfISMBDV7sFfe-lDCf_CaJKu26raVgLOcsJnyEPm19PPyIlxFnOc0-v6LjL-htn39A6AnabarWfgVa0xSn6M34Dz0Ng9df5zc_50_vGPd7 |
link.rule.ids | 314,780,784,4502,24116,27924,27925,45585,45679 |
linkProvider | Elsevier |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1La9wwEB5CAm0vpelz27TVoVdnZUu27NzCkrBpsnsoCeRShKxH2YV4Fz9Cf35GXtm0lNBDjhYWsmek-T6h-UYA33BjkopCmMho6iJfkSpSRZpGonSIn5lO09ILhRfLbH7Dv9-mt3swG7QwPq0yxP5dTO-jdWiZBmtOt6uV1_gitHFfT6svMoNboANkAwKn9sHpxeV8OQZkJmg8Fg3HDn8IhdfH6601TVf_ClleyTGNk8cw6jEO2mPR-St4GUgkOd195yHs2eo1PFuEY_I38HM23i5INo4gxyPLrmmIqkz_8EPdr9BbpEcv09WWIHUlXnPZNcT-1upetd0dqRGqVvUJUeTOtipSoX7JW7g5P7uezaNwj0KkcXm2EXMmFha5hslVUnKhSsqF4SazCXWcaZ263OZWZYIlBXWGOty2Zlo4h_DPuGXvYL_aVPYDEB4LZ1kaO17mHMkbkhlNS8aUV9TmupjAdLCc3O7KZcghj2wtB1tLb2tJE4m2noAYDCwHMSiGL9uEtdTIWDb4pvzH3xMoxp5_TRmJaPDfUcngS4nryR-SqMpuukYKxgrOEson8H7n4_FHvIw4L-L84xMG_grP59eLK3l1sbz8BC-GXAQaH8F-W3f2M1KctvwSpvADRrn31Q |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+the+Nuss+and+the+Ravitch+procedure+for+pectus+excavatum+repair%3A+a+meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+pediatric+surgery&rft.au=Nasr%2C+Ahmed&rft.au=Fecteau%2C+Annie&rft.au=Wales%2C+Paul+W&rft.date=2010-05-01&rft.eissn=1531-5037&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=880&rft.epage=886&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jpedsurg.2010.02.012&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_m | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F00223468%2FS0022346810X00057%2Fcov150h.gif |