动态负压疗法与标准负压疗法治疗漏斗胸的比较研究：短期治疗效果分析
Dynamic versus Standard Vacuum Therapy for Pectus Excavatum: A Comparative Study of Short-Term Treatment Outcomes.
作者
作者单位
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: drufukates@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: dr.selinfirat@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: dr.kutaybahadir@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: drerdemaltinorgu@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: sagpazarilayda@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: dr.muhammed.ozkan@gmail.com.
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: cakmakma@hotmail.com.
- Demiroglu Bilim University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, İstanbul, Turkey. Electronic address: drmustafayuksel@gmail.com.
摘要
中文
负压钟（vacuum bell）疗法越来越多地用于轻中度漏斗胸（pectus excavatum, PE）的非手术治疗。然而，比较不同负压系统的证据仍然有限。本研究比较了动态负压疗法（DVT）和标准负压疗法（SVT）作为 PE 主要非手术治疗方案的短期疗效。这项回顾性比较队列研究纳入了 2024 至 2026 年间接受负压治疗的 78 例 PE 患者，其中 38 例接受 DVT，40 例接受 SVT。分别于基线和 6 个月时测量畸形深度。主要结局包括畸形深度的绝对改善、完全或接近完全矫正（残余畸形深度 ≤0.5 cm）、显著反应（较基线减少 ≥1 cm）、治疗持续性、患者满意度及设备相关不良事件。DVT 组患者年龄大于 SVT 组（p = 0.009），且基线畸形深度更大（2.01 ± 0.58 vs. 1.43 ± 0.60 cm，p < 0.001）。6 个月时两组平均矫正程度相似（p = 0.184）。完全或接近完全矫正更常见于 SVT 组。相反，减少 ≥1 cm 更常见于 DVT 组（47.4% vs. 25.0%，p = 0.040；OR，2.70；95% CI，1.04-7.04）。治疗中断仅发生在 SVT 组（0.0% vs. 15.0%，p = 0.026）。两组患者满意度相似。皮肤相关主诉在 DVT 组更常见，但所有不良事件均为轻度。两种系统均可短期改善 PE。SVT 更常实现残余深度 ≤0.5 cm，可能反映了较低的基线严重程度，而 DVT 表现出更高的未校正 ≥1 cm 反应率和更好的治疗持续性。由于两组基线特征差异以及缺乏充分的混杂因素调整，这些发现应谨慎解读。仍需前瞻性研究以确认 DVT 是否具有持续的临床优势。
English
Vacuum bell therapy is increasingly used as a nonoperative treatment for mild-to-moderate pectus excavatum (PE). However, evidence comparing different vacuum systems remains limited. In this study, we compared the short-term outcomes of dynamic vacuum therapy (DVT) and standard vacuum therapy (SVT) as primary nonoperative treatment approaches for PE. This retrospective comparative cohort study included 78 patients with PE treated with vacuum therapy between 2024 and 2026, of whom 38 received DVT and 40 received SVT. Deformity depth was measured at baseline and again at 6 months. The primary outcomes were absolute improvement in deformity depth, complete or near-complete correction (residual deformity depth ≤0.5 cm), a marked response (reduction of ≥1 cm from baseline), treatment continuation, patient satisfaction, and device-related adverse events. Patients in the DVT group were older than those in the SVT group (p = 0.009) and had greater baseline deformity depth (2.01 ± 0.58 vs. 1.43 ± 0.60 cm, p < 0.001). Mean correction at 6 months was similar between the two groups (p = 0.184). Complete or near-complete correction was more common in the SVT group. In contrast, a reduction of ≥1 cm was more common in the DVT group (47.4% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.040; OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.04-7.04). Treatment discontinuation occurred only in the SVT group (0.0% vs. 15.0%, p = 0.026). Patient satisfaction was similar between groups. Skin-related complaints were more frequent with DVT, although all adverse events were minor. Both systems provided short-term improvement in PE. SVT more often achieved a residual depth ≤0.5 cm, likely reflecting lower baseline severity, whereas DVT showed a higher unadjusted ≥1 cm response rate and better treatment continuation. These findings should be interpreted cautiously because of baseline differences between groups and the absence of full confounder adjustment. Prospective studies are needed to confirm whether DVT provides a sustained clinical advantage.
分类与指标
- 研究类型
- 临床研究
- 病种
- 气胸·外伤·胸壁
- JCR 分区
- Q2
- 影响因子
- 2.3
- 新锐分区
- 2区