2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5223(00)70238-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bioabsorbable weave technique for repair of pectus excavatum

Abstract: The risk of recurrent deformity after repair of pectus excavatum has led many surgeons to use some form of posterior support. Various methods have been developed, including the use of stainless steel struts, Kirschner wires, autologous ribs, and mesh. When metallic supports are used, uncommon yet serious complications may occur. Reported adverse consequences of these devices have included migration into the peritoneal cavity, laceration of the phrenic artery and hemorrhage, and migration through the pericardiu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 3 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the structures used as struts in the past were Kirschner's wires, sewing of sternum with steel sutures, metal (stainless steel) struts, resin strut, seagull wing prosthesis, Steinman pins, Rehbein splint, a vascularized rib strut, Marlex mesh, bioabsorbable polydioxanone weave, and bioabsorbable poly-L-lactide plaque. [216171819202122] The shortcoming of most of these techniques was the cost of the strut and the requirement of a second surgery for the removal. Besides, absorbable alternatives are very costly and not readily available.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of the structures used as struts in the past were Kirschner's wires, sewing of sternum with steel sutures, metal (stainless steel) struts, resin strut, seagull wing prosthesis, Steinman pins, Rehbein splint, a vascularized rib strut, Marlex mesh, bioabsorbable polydioxanone weave, and bioabsorbable poly-L-lactide plaque. [216171819202122] The shortcoming of most of these techniques was the cost of the strut and the requirement of a second surgery for the removal. Besides, absorbable alternatives are very costly and not readily available.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%