Search

The study objective was to examine pulmonary function and quality of life improvement after robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty for patients with different degrees of obstructive airway disease. We performed a retrospective review of a prospective database of patients who underwent robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty between 2013 and 2020. A total of 118 patients underwent robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty. Preoperative and postoperative pulmonary function tests were available for 108 patients. Postoperative pulmonary function tests at a median of 16 months demonstrated a significant increase in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (preoperative median: 76.76% predicted, postoperative: 83% predicted, P =.002). Preoperative and postoperative St George Respiratory Questionnaires were available for 64 patients with a significant decrease in postoperative score at a median of 7 months (preoperative median: 61, postoperative: 41.60, P <.001). When stratified by preoperative degree of obstruction, robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second in moderate to very severe obstruction with a statistically significant improvement in moderate (preoperative median: 63.91% predicted, postoperative median: 73% predicted, P =.001) and severe (preoperative median: 44% predicted, postoperative median: 57% predicted, P =.007) obstruction. St George Respiratory Questionnaire scores improved for all patients. Improvement for mild (preoperative median: 61.27, postoperative median: 36.71, P <.001) and moderate (preoperative median: 57.15, postoperative median: 47.52, P =.03) obstruction was statistically significant. Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty improves obstruction and symptoms. With limited follow-up, subgroup analysis showed forced expiratory volume in 1 second improved in severe preoperative obstruction and quality of life improved in moderate obstruction. Future follow-up is required to determine robotic-assisted thoracoscopic tracheobronchoplasty effects on the most severe group, but we cannot conclude that increased degree of preoperative obstruction precludes surgery. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of open lobectomy (OL), VATS, and robotic-assisted lobectomy (RL). Summary Background Data: Robotic-assisted lobectomy has seen increasing adoption for treatment of early-stage lung cancer. Comparative data regarding these approaches is largely from single-institution case series or administrative datasets. Methods: Retrospective data was collected from 21 institutions from 2013 to 2019. All consecutive cases performed for clinical stage IA-IIIA lung cancer were included. Neoadjuvant cases were excluded. Propensity-score matching (1:1) was based on age, sex, race, smoking-status, FEV1%, Zubrod score, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor size, and clinical T and N stage. Results: A total of 2391 RL, 2174 VATS, and 1156 OL cases were included. After propensity-score matching there were 885 pairs of RL vs OL, 1,711 pairs of RL vs VATS, and 952 pairs of VATS vs OL. Operative time for RL was shorter than VATS (P < 0.0001) and OL (P = 0.0004). Compared to OL, RL and VATS had less overall postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay (LOS), and lower transfusion rates (all P <0.02). Compared to VATS, RL had lower conversion rate (P <0.0001), shorter hospital stay (P <0.0001) and a lower postoperative transfusion rate (P =0.01). RL and VATS cohorts had comparable postoperative complication rates. In-hospital mortality was comparable between all groups. Conclusions: RL and VATS approaches were associated with favorable perioperative outcomes compared to OL. Robotic-assisted lobectomy was also associated with a reduced length of stay and decreased conversion rate when compared to VATS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES This study reports the results of an international expert consensus process evaluating the assessment of intraoperative air leaks (IAL) and treatment of postoperative prolonged air leaks (PAL) utilizing a Delphi process, with the aim of helping standardization and improving practice. METHODS A panel of 45 questions was developed and submitted to an international working group of experts in minimally invasive lung cancer surgery. Modified Delphi methodology was used to review responses, including 3 rounds of voting. The consensus was defined a priori as >50% agreement among the experts. Clinical practice standards were graded as recommended or highly recommended if 50–74% or >75% of the experts reached an agreement, respectively. RESULTS A total of 32 experts from 18 countries completed the questionnaires in all 3 rounds. Respondents agreed that PAL are defined as >5 days and that current risk models are rarely used. The consensus was reached in 33/45 issues (73.3%). IAL were classified as mild (<100 ml/min; 81%), moderate (100–400 ml/min; 71%) and severe (>400 ml/min; 74%). If mild IAL are detected, 68% do not treat; if moderate, consensus was not; if severe, 90% favoured treatment. CONCLUSIONS This expert consensus working group reached an agreement on the majority of issues regarding the detection and management of IAL and PAL. In the absence of prospective, randomized evidence supporting most of these clinical decisions, this document may serve as a guideline to reduce practice variation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]