| Literature DB >> 32917246 |
Ling-Chen Huang1, Dao-Zhong Chen1, Liang-Wan Chen1, Qi-Chen Xu1, Zi-He Zheng1, Xiao-Fu Dai2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conventional median sternotomy is widely used in cardiac surgery, while thoracoscopic cardiac surgery, which is considered to have aesthetic advantages, is being performed increasingly more often in China because patients' requests for minimally invasive procedures yielding aesthetically pleasing results have significantly increased. Few studies have been conducted to assess surgical scars after cardiac surgery. Compared to the median sternotomy approach, multiple-incision totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery requires smaller but numerous and scattered incisions. In addition to two working ports on the upper and lower margins of the right breast, an inguinal incision and an axillary incision are made. Therefore, does totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery truly have aesthetic advantages? This study has the following objectives: (a) to compare median sternotomy cardiac surgery and total thoracoscopic cardiac surgery in terms of the long-term cosmetic outcomes of post-operative scars and (b) to evaluate the effectiveness of the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating scale in combination with the numeric rating scale in the assessment of surgical scars after cardiac surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac surgery; Cosmetic outcomes; Median Sternotomy; Scar assessment; Totally thoracoscopic
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32917246 PMCID: PMC7488440 DOI: 10.1186/s13019-020-01294-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg ISSN: 1749-8090 Impact factor: 1.637
Fig. 1Totally thoracoscopic incision with soft tissue retractor in place
Fig. 2Sutured incision after the totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery
The Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) scale
| Parameter | Descriptor | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Clinician questions | ||
| Scar spread | None/near invisible | 0 |
| Pencil-thin line | 1 | |
| Mild spread, noticeable on close inspection | 2 | |
| Moderate spread, obvious scarring | 3 | |
| Severe spread | 4 | |
| Erythema | None | 0 |
| Light pink, some telangiectasias may be present | 1 | |
| Red, many telangiectasias may be present | 2 | |
| Deep red or purple | 3 | |
| Dyspigmentation | Absent | 0 |
| Present | 1 | |
| Suture marks | Absent | 0 |
| Present | 1 | |
| Hypertrophy/atrophy | None | 0 |
| Mild: palpable, barely visible hypertrophy or atrophy | 1 | |
| Moderate: clearly visible hypertrophy or atrophy | 2 | |
| Severe: marked hypertrophy or atrophy or keloid formation | 3 | |
| Overall impression | Desirable scar | 0 |
| Undesirable scar | 1 | |
| Patient questions | ||
| Itch | No | 0 |
| Yes | 1 | |
| Pain | No | 0 |
| Yes | 1 | |
Fig. 3The application of the SCAR scale in study cases of the totally thoracoscopic group
Demographic and clinical data compared between TA group and SA group
| Item | TA group | SA group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male/Female | 15/17 | 22/19 | 0.57 |
| Age (years) | 52.49 ± 10.17 | 51.69 ± 10.69 | 0.88 |
| Current NYHA (median) | II | II | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.26 ± 1.51 | 22.49 ± 1.73 | 0.64 |
| Mortality | 0 | 0 | NS |
| Morbidity (severe events) | |||
| Embolism | 1 | 0 | 0.44 |
| Bleeding Events | 2 | 1 | 0.58 |
| Poor wound healing | 2 | 2 | 1.00 |
| Subcutaneous emphysema | 2 | 0 | 0.18 |
NYHA class New York Heart Association functional classification, BMI body mass index
Inter-rater reliability of the SCAR scale: Spearman’s correlation analyses
| SCAR parameter | Correlation coefficient | |
|---|---|---|
| Scar spread | 0.76 | |
| Erythema | 0.72 | |
| Dyspigmentation | 0.81 | |
| Track marks or suture marks | 0.75 | |
| Hypertrophy/atrophy | 0.77 | |
| Overall impression | 0.82 | |
| Itch | 1.00 | |
| Pain | 1.00 | |
| Overall scores | 0.83 |
Correlation coefficients: 0–0.20 = “week”; 0.21–0.40 = “fair”; 0.41–0.60 = “moderate”; 0.61–0.80 = “strong” reliability; 0.81–1.00 = “strongly” reliability [12]
Cosmetic effect of surgical scars between two different approaches
| parameter | TA group | SA group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scar spread (median) | 1 | 1 | 0.18 |
| Erythema (median) | 1 | 1 | 0.84 |
| Dyspigmentation (median) | 0 | 1 | 0.15 |
| Track marks or suture marks (median) | 1 | 1 | 0.31 |
| Hypertrophy/atrophy (median) | 1 | 1 | 0.54 |
| Overall impression (median) | 0 | 0 | 0.04 |
| Patient questions (median) | 0 | 0 | 0.049 |
| Overall SCAR scores (median) | 3 | 5 | 0.04 |
| NRS scores | 3.07 ± 2.40 | 4.80 ± 2.04 | 0.04 |
| Scar length | 13.42 ± 2.14 | 20.21 ± 2.92 | P<0.01 |
Significant differences were found in the scores of Overall impression, Patient questions, Overall SCAR scores and NRS scores of both sides between the two groups. (P<0.05)
Fig. 4Postoperative view of reluctant chest scar hypertrophy