← Eichor
Study identifier: NCT07312448 Synced from ClinicalTrials.gov · July 29, 2026
● Recruiting

Comparative Analysis Of Modified Vs. Classical Nuss Technique In The Surgical Correction Of Pectus Excavatum "

Condition: Pectus Excavatum  ·  Sponsor: University Hospital, Strasbourg, France

PhaseN/A
Planned participants80
Who can joinAll sexes, 11 Years to 18 Years
Healthy volunteersNo

About this study

Although the NUSS technique has become the standard minimally invasive procedure for correcting this deformity, there is a lack of comparative data between the classic and modified NUSS techniques. This research aims to fill this gap by comparing these two methods in terms of various outcomes, such as operative time, postoperative pain control, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and overall cosmetic results. This study addresses the need to optimize surgical techniques to improve patient outcomes. By evaluating these two approaches, the research seeks to provide insights that could lead to better management strategies for patients with pectus excavatum, potentially influencing future clinical practices.

This description comes directly from the study's public registry record.

Talk to the study team

Isabelle TALON, MD, PhD  ·  33 3 88 12 72 96  ·  Isabelle.TALON@chru-strasbourg.fr

Always discuss trial participation with your own doctor first.

Locations (1)

Service de Chirurgie Pédiatrique - Réanimation - CHU de Strasbourg - FranceStrasbourg, FranceRecruiting

Follow this study

Get one email when the public record changes — results posted, or the study's status changes. Nothing else, ever.

We email about this public record only. Unsubscribe anytime with one click. Never medical advice.

Is this your study? This page was generated automatically from the public registry record. Sponsors can claim it — free — to add branding and verified contact routing. Claim this page →

This page is independently generated by Eichor from the public ClinicalTrials.gov record and re-synced daily. It is not the sponsor's official website unless claimed. Nothing here is medical advice; eligibility is always determined by the study team — talk to your own doctor first.

Source record: clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07312448