Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Quasilobar minimalist lung volume reduction surgery.
Pompeo, Eugenio; Elkhouly, Ahmed; Rogliani, Paola; Dauri, Mario; Peer, Michael; Sergiacomi, Gianluigi; Sorge, Roberto.
Afiliação
  • Pompeo E; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
  • Elkhouly A; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
  • Rogliani P; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
  • Dauri M; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
  • Peer M; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Ichilov Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.
  • Sergiacomi G; Department of Radiology, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
  • Sorge R; Department of Biostatistics, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg ; 60(3): 598-606, 2021 09 11.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33860323
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Our goal was to assess the results and the costs of the quasilobar minimalist (QLM) thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (LVR) surgical method developed to minimize the trauma from the operation and the anaesthesia and to maximize the effect of the lobar volume reduction.

METHODS:

Forty patients with severe emphysema underwent QLM-LVR that entailed adoption of sole intercostal block analgesia and lobar plication through a single thoracoscopic incision. Results were compared after propensity matching with 2 control groups undergoing non-awake resectional LVR with double-lumen tracheal intubation or awake non-resectional LVR by plication with thoracic epidural anaesthesia. As a result, we had 3 matched groups of 30 patients each.

RESULTS:

Baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 s, residual volume, the 6-min walking test and the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea index were 0.77 ± 0.18, 4.97 ± 0.6, 328 ± 65 and 3.3 ± 0.7, respectively, with no intergroup difference after propensity score matching. The visual pain score was better (P < 0.007), the hospital stay was shorter (P < 0.04) and overall costs were lower (P < 0.04) in the QLM-LVR group than in the control groups. The morbidity rate was lower with QLM-LVR than with non-awake resectional-LVR (P = 0.006). Significant improvements (P < 0.001) occurred in all study groups during the follow-up period. At 24 months, improvements in residual volume and dyspnoea index were significantly better with QLM-LVR (P < 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS:

QLM-LVR proved safe and showed better perioperative outcomes and lower procedure-related costs than the control groups. Similar clinical benefit occurred at 12 months, but absolute improvements in residual volume and dyspnoea index were better in the QLM-LVR group at 24 months.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonectomia / Enfisema Pulmonar Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Assunto da revista: CARDIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonectomia / Enfisema Pulmonar Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Assunto da revista: CARDIOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália