Reply on safety in rib surgery
This is Dr. Manzaneda's second published reply within the safety debate on rib remodeling. He signs it with seven co-authors, answering a letter from a US group prompted by the field's systematic review and meta-analysis.
The exchange, in order
The systematic review and meta-analysis of the technique drew letters from several groups. This reply answers the one by Hadid, Bohler, Arora and Chaiyasate (doi 10.1097/GOX.0000000000007800), published in the same journal.
A procedure drawing cross-letters in indexed journals is not a warning sign: it is how the literature argues. What matters is that the technique's creator takes part under his own name, in the same pages where he is challenged.
What we cannot say yet
This letter is not open access: it is not deposited in PubMed Central and its full text is not public. This page therefore records only what the bibliographic registries hold — authors, journal, date, identifiers — and does not describe its arguments. It will be completed once we have the text.
Where the underlying evidence is
The data behind the safety discussion sit in works that are public:
- the 3,805-patient cohort, the largest published series on the technique;
- the 113-surgeon survey and its published reply;
- the safety page, which brings the above together.