Risk analysis for thoracoscopic lung volume reduction: a multi-institutional experience

Objective: Most reports of thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (TLVR) are relatively small and early experiences from a single institution, factors which limit both the statistical validity and the applicability to the population at large. In order to address these shortcomings we undertook an analysis of the TLVR experience at five separate institutions to assess operative morbidity and identify predictors of mortality. Methods: Questionnaires were sent to four groups of surgical investigators at five institutions actively performing TLVR. Data was requested regarding preoperative, operative and postoperative parameters. Twenty-five potential predictors of mortality were analyzed and seven proved to be at least marginally significant (P<0.10). These parameters were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors. Results: The 682 patients (415 males, 267 females, mean age 64.0 years) underwent unilateral (410) or bilateral (272) TLVRs. Overall, operative mortality was 6% with half of the deaths resulting from respiratory causes. The remaining patients were discharged to home (88%), a rehabilitation facility (4%) or a ventilator facility (2%). There were 25 perioperative factors chosen representing clinically important indices such as spirometry, oxygenation, functional status, clinical and demographic variables. Univariate analysis identified seven variables as predictors of mortality (P<0.10) and these were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Only age, 6-min walk, gender (male 8%, female 3% mortality) and the procedure performed (unilateral 4.6%, bilateral 8%) were independent predictors while preoperative steroid therapy, preoperative oxygen administration, and time since smoking cessation dropped out of the model. The specific institution, learning curve (early vs. late experience), type of lung disease, spirometric indices and predicted maximum VO₂ were not significant predictors. Conclusion: This experience suggests that unilateral and bilateral lung volume reduction procedure can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Although age, gender, exercise capacity and the procedure performed are all independent predictors of mortality, the risk of operative death did not appear excessive in this fragile patient subset.     

胸腔镜肺减容术围手术期处理

目的总结40例电视胸腔镜肺减容术(lung volum e reduction surgery,LVRS)围手术期处理经验。方法1999年7月~2005年12月,我院对40例重症慢性阻塞性肺部疾病行电视胸腔镜肺减容术(23例附加胸壁小切口),术中均采用内镜切割缝合器切除一侧肺容积的20%~30%。结果双肺减容术13例(单纯胸腔镜手术7例,辅助小切口6例),单肺减容术27例(单纯胸腔镜手术10例,辅助小切口17例)。本组无手术死亡。40例术后住院9~41 d,平均18 d。术后呼吸困难症状明显缓解,呼吸指数均上升1~2级。术前与术后1个月肺功能比较:第1秒用力呼气量(forced exp iratory volum ein 1 second,FEV1)占预计值百分比(48.3±4.9)%vs(68.5±5.6)%(t=17.169,P=0.000);残气量(residual volum e,RV)占预计值百分比(270.0±23.6)%vs(188.0±19.8)%(t=16.835,P=0.000);肺总量(total lung capac ity,TLC)占预计值百分比(123.0±9.8)%vs(102.0±8.7)%(t=10.135,P=0.000)。10例术后肺漏气,5例肺部感染,3例支气管哮喘,患者经对症治疗后均痊愈。37例随访3~77个月,平均46个月,3例术后6、10、20个月死于肺癌,2例术后3个月和8个月死于食管癌,1例术后6个月死于脑血管病,余31例全部存活。结论术中熟练掌握胸腔镜手术技巧,围手术期积极预防和处理并发症,是保证手术成功和患者早日康复的关键。     

胸腔镜肺减容手术临床观察

目的探讨慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD）患者应用胸腔镜行肺减容手术的方法及疗效。方法2004年10月至2007年6月,对23例重度COPD行胸腔镜肺减容手术。均为CT诊断非均质性COPD合并肺大疱患者,术前第一秒用力呼气量（FEV1）占预计值百分比（55．6&#177;4．9）％,残气量占肺总量比值（RV／TLC）（49．4&#177;8．3）％。采用内镜切割缝合器（Endo—GIA）切除单侧肺容积20％～30％。结果手术时间（38．0&#177;4．3）min,术中出血少于100ml。术后复张性肺水肿3例,肺部感染4例,没有持续漏气,最长漏气达12d。胸液量150～400ml,胸管置留时间（6．3&#177;2．1）d,术后住院时间（13．8&#177;5．3）d。术后6个月FEV1％（61．8&#177;4．0）％,RV／TLC（36．6&#177;4．8）％,与术前比较P〈0．001,未见气胸复发。结论对非均质性COPD并肺大疱患者应用胸腔镜肺大疱切除术能较好改善患者症状,并发症少,疗效满意。     

Combined video-assisted thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery and lobectomy in a high-risk patient

Nonsmall cell lung cancer often occurs in patients with severe emphysema. Lobectomy in these patients is often contraindicated due to extensive parenchymal destruction and subsequent pulmonary insufficiency. Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy has been described as a less morbid procedure in high-risk patients. Lung volume reduction surgery has been shown to improve pulmonary function in selected patients with emphysema. We describe the successful combination of lobectomy and lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) with a video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) approach in a high-risk patient with Stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer.     

Long-term results of lung volume reduction surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is effective in the short and intermediate term for the improvement of pulmonary function and subjective symptoms in selected patients with advanced emphysema. The purpose of this study was to examine the long-term functional results of LVRS and to investigate which subgroups would benefit in terms of long-term survival. METHODS: All records of the patients who underwent LVRS between 1994 and, 1998 at our hospital were reviewed. RESULTS: Eighty-eight consecutive patients underwent LVRS during the period. There were 62 men and 26 women with an average age of 56.1 years (range 34-72 years). Eleven patients with alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency were included. The perioperative mortality rate (<90 days) was 2.3% (n=2). Total lung capacity (7.5+/-0.3 l) and residual volume (4.8+/-0.3 l) at 3 years remained lower than baseline (9.2+/-0.2 l, 6.5+/-0.2 l, each) (P<0.001). The mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) at 3 years (0.86+/-0.08 l) was higher than baseline (0.78+/-0.02 l), but the difference did not reach statistical significance. The FEV(1) of the patients with alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency and of those with respiratory bronchiolitis returned to baseline at one year after LVRS and showed further deterioration. Overall survival rate at 5 years was 71.0% with the mean length of follow-up of 54.2 months. The survival difference was statistically significant between patients with preoperative FEV(1) >or=28.5% and those with FEV(1)<28.5% (P=0.0152). CONCLUSIONS: The improvement of total lung capacity and residual volume persisted long after the operation. Patients with alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency and those with bronchiolitis showed early deterioration of the lung function. Patients with higher preoperative FEV(1) had a survival benefit. The favorable long-term survival might justify LVRS for the treatment of selected patients with severe emphysema.     

Complications after lung volume reduction surgery

LVRS has greater morbidity than most general thoracic surgical procedures. Proper care of patients after LVRS is a labor-intensive activity, but it is worthwhile because LVRS can be performed with acceptable risk. Patient selection, postoperative care, and an understanding of the potential complications are the keys to successful LVRS.     

A case of thoracoscopic bilateral lung volume reduction surgery in a supine position.

We present a case of thoracoscopic bilateral lung volume reduction surgery performed with the patient in a supine position. By rotating the operative table, bilateral apical resection could be performed without difficulty. The duration of the operation was 160 minutes and the patient's forced expiratory volume in 1 second improved from 0.81 l to 2.49 l.     

Comparison of clinical results for unilateral and bilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction

Background. It is widely believed that bilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (BTLVR) yields superior results when compared with unilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (UTLVR) with regard to spirometry, functional capacity, oxygenation and quality of life results.

Methods. To address these issues, we compared the results of patients undergoing UTLVR (N = 338 patients) and BTLVR (N = 344 patients) from 1993 to 1998 at five institutions. Follow-up data were available on 671 patients (98.4%) between 6 and 12 months after surgery, and a patient self-assessment was obtained at a mean of 24 months.

Results. It was found that BTLVR provides superior improvement in measured postoperative percent change in FEV₁ (L) (UTLVR 23.3% ± 55.3 vs BTLVR 33% ± 41, p = 0.04), FVC(L) (10.5% ± 31.6 vs 20.3% ± 34.3, p = 0.002) and RV(L) (−13% ± −22 vs −22% ± 17.9, p = 0.015). BTLVR also provides a slight improvement over UTLVR in patient’s perception regarding improved quality of life (UTLVR 79% vs BTLVR 88%, p = 0.03) and dyspnea relief (71% vs 61%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in mean changes in Po₂ (mm Hg) (UTLV 4.5 ± 12.3 vs BTLVR 4.9 ± 13.3, p = NS), 6-minute walk (UTLVR 26% ± 66.1 vs BTLVR 31% ± 59.6, p = NS) or decreased oxygen utilization (UTLVR 78% vs BTLVR 74%, p = NS).

Conclusions. These data suggest that both UTLVR and BTLVR yield significant improvement, but the results of BTLVR seem to be superior with regard to spirometry, lung volumes, and quality of life.     

Long-term results after lung volume reduction surgery in patients with alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency

BACKGROUND: The favorable effects of lung volume reduction surgery for selected patients with smoker's emphysema has been demonstrated. However, outcome data for patients with alpha(1)-antitrypsin deficiency emphysema are scarce. METHODS: We prospectively studied pulmonary function, dyspnea, and 6-minute walking distance in 21 patients with severe alpha(1)-antitrypsin deficiency emphysema (PiZZ 18, PiZO 1, PiSZ 2, 10 female patients, median age 56 years, range 38-74 years) for as long as 5 years after thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery. RESULTS: Lung volume reduction surgery improved the mean dyspnea score, from 3.7 +/- 0.1 preoperatively to 1.4 +/- 0.2 at 3 months; the score remained improved for as long as 3.5 years. Mean vital capacity (% predicted) improved from 79% +/- 4.4% to 98% +/- 4.8% at 3 months, and the ratio of residual volume to total lung capacity decreased from 0.67 to 0.51. These improvements lasted for as long as 2 years. The mean airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second % predicted) improved from 27% +/- 1.9% to 38% +/- 3.3% at 3 months and remained statistically improved for 1 year. Four patients showed long-term improvement in lung function for as long as 3.5 years. These patients had markedly heterogeneous emphysema and showed no radiologic signs of airway inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Lung volume reduction surgery in patients with advanced emphysema from alpha(1)-antitrypsin deficiency results in a significant improvement in dyspnea and lung function for as long as 3.5 years in some cases. It appears that magnitude and duration of these effects are inferior and shorter than those in patients with pure smoker's emphysema. Patients with heterogeneous disease and no or minor inflammatory airway disease may benefit most.     

Postoperative pain detracts from early health status improvement seen after video-assisted thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) on postoperative pain. METHODS: Fifty-two patients, 34 male/18 female, median age 59 (46-70) years, underwent unilateral video-assisted thoracoscopic (VAT) LVRS. FEV(1), TLC, RV and RV/TLC ratio were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months post surgery. At the same time interval health status was assessed by Euroquol and SF 36 questionnaires. RESULTS: Significant improvements in health status, as assessed by SF 36, persisted from 3 months to 1 year. However, in the pain domain there was a worsening of the mean score from 74 preoperatively to 64 at 3 months, 68 at 6 months, 73 at 12 months and 65 at 24 months. The improvements in Euroquol score were not statistically significant. However, they became significant for at least 2 years postoperatively, when those patients who had a worsening pain score postoperatively were excluded. While the percentage of patients with a worsening of pain scores measured with SF 36 remained between 40 and 45% even 2 years after LVRS, when using Euroquol this percentage did decrease from 30% at 3 months to 14% at 2 years. There was no significant correlation between the change of scores and length of operation, hospital stay or air leak. It was also not statistically significant whether these patients had an extra procedure (redo thoracotomy or insertion of extra drain postoperatively). There were some significant correlations between changes in hyperinflation and changes in pain scores but this was not consistent for Euroquol and SF 36. CONCLUSION: Postoperative pain detracts from global improvement in health status after LVRS even after unilateral VATS. There may be an influence of alterations in chest mechanics after surgery on the development of pain.     

Pseudo tumors of the lung after lung volume reduction surgery

We describe 2 patients who underwent lung volume reduction surgery, who postoperatively had computed tomographic scans that showed symptomatic mass lesions suggestive of malignancy and an inhaled foreign body. Investigations excluded these conditions with the remaining likely diagnosis of pseudotumor secondary to buttressing material. These potential sequelae of lung volume reduction surgery should be recognized in follow-up investigations.     

Quality of life after lung volume reduction surgery

The common physiologic and functional variables that quantify limitation in emphysema patients have been the most common outcomes measured after LVRS. Spirometric values and exercise capacity are merely surrogates, however, for their impact on symptoms and QOL in patients with severe emphysema. Because LVRS has been developed as a surgery to palliate disabling symptoms of emphysema, many studies now have included HRQOL outcomes along with the commonly measured physiologic and functional outcomes. Some studies have centered on the QOL as the primary outcome instead of physiologic variables. Many symptom scales and disease-specific and general instruments of HRQOL have been used for evaluating emphysema patients before and after LVRS. Case-control studies and randomized studies have shown a consistent improvement in symptoms related to emphysema and general QOL. These studies validate the use of LVRS as a palliative therapy for selected patients with emphysema. The NETT suggests that this benefit is applicable primarily to patients with an upper lobe-predominant pattern of emphysema or patients with low exercise capacity. Validation or refinement of these criteria depends on the continued contributions of the many investigators performing LVRS.     

单肺移植同期行肺减容术纠正移植肺容积不匹配

目的 探讨单肺移植同期行肺减容术纠正移植肺容积不匹配的有效性和安全性.方法 24例次单肺移植的受者中,男性20例,女性4例,年龄(54.6±12.2)岁(28～75岁).原发病为终末期慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)14例,COPD合并上叶毁损肺1例,COPD合并尘肺1例,终末期肺间质纤维化6例,淋巴管血管平滑肌瘤病1例,肺移植术后闭塞性细支气管炎综合征1例.采用右侧单肺移植16例,左侧单肺移植8例.肺减容采用开胸手术,移植肺减容在移植同期的手术视野下操作,自体肺减容采用移植肺对侧的前外侧小切口进胸.术后将受者分为减容组和对照组.减容组有8例受者,其中移植肺减容5例,自体病肺减容2例,移植肺和自体肺共减容1例.将未接受肺减容术的16例受者作为对照组.观察和比较上述两组受者间肺功能等各项临床指标的差异.结果 原发病为COPD的受者中有2例接受了肺减容术,占14.3%(2/14),明显低于其他原发病者接受肺减容术的比例(60%,6/10),二者间差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).减容组和对照组分别有50.0%和25%的受者术后胸部X线片显示纵隔位置居中,两组比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组间其余各项临床指标的比较,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).但减容组受者的机械通气时间、胸管引流时间、漏气时间、胸管引流量都有增加的趋势,术后胸穿抽液次数和总量都有下降的趋势.有8例未行术后肺功能复查,其余16例次移植肺功能资料齐全,减容组4例,对照组12例,两组间术后第1秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)改善的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 单肺移植同期行移植肺或自体肺减容术对纠正移植肺容积不匹配是安全、有效的方法,可以改善移植肺的通气血流比例.     

Long-term survival after salvage surgery for colorectal lung metastases

We report the case of a patient with an extended pneumonectomy for colorectal lung metastases after the failure of multimodal treatment. Salvage surgery may be useful in highly selected patients to achieve local control, resulting in long-term disease-free survival.