RESUMEN
Objectives: Surgery through a single port may be less painful because access is supplied by 1 intercostal nerve or more painful because multiple instruments are used in 1 port. We analyzed data collected from the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery group of a randomized controlled trial to compare differences in pain up to 1 year. Methods: Groups were compared in a prespecified exploratory analysis using direct (regression) and indirect comparison (difference with respect to thoracotomy). In-hospital visual analogue scale pain scores were used, and analgesic ratios were calculated. After discharge, pain was evaluated using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires-Core 30 scores up to 1 year. Results: From July 2015 to February 2019, we randomized 503 participants. After excluding 50 participants who did not receive lobectomy, surgery was performed using a single port in 42 participants (predominately by a single surgeon), multiple ports in 166 participants, and thoracotomy in 245 participants. No differences were observed in-hospital between single- and multiple-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery when modeled using a direct comparison, mean difference of -0.24 (95% CI, -1.06 to 0.58) or indirect comparison, mean difference of -0.33 (-1.16 to 0.51). Mean analgesic ratio (single/multiple port) was 0.75 (0.64 to 0.87) for direct comparison and 0.90 (0.64 to 1.25) for indirect comparison. After discharge, pain for single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery was lower than for multiple-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (first 3 months), and corresponding physical function was higher up to 12 months. Conclusions: There were no consistent differences for in-hospital pain when lobectomy was undertaken using 1 or multiple ports. However, better pain scores and physical function were observed for single-port surgery after discharge.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Classifying radiologic pulmonary lesions as malignant is challenging. Scoring systems like the Mayo model lack precision in predicting the probability of malignancy. We developed the logistic scoring system 'LIONS PREY' (Lung lesION Score PREdicts malignancY), which is superior to existing models in its precision in determining the likelihood of malignancy. METHODS: We evaluated all patients that were presented to our multidisciplinary team between January 2013 and December 2020. Availability of pathological results after resection or CT-/EBUS-guided sampling was mandatory for study inclusion. Two groups were formed: Group A (malignant nodule; n = 238) and Group B (benign nodule; n = 148). Initially, 22 potential score parameters were derived from the patients' medical histories. RESULTS: After uni- and multivariate analysis, we identified the following eight parameters that were integrated into a scoring system: (1) age (Group A: 64.5 ± 10.2 years vs. Group B: 61.6 ± 13.8 years; multivariate p-value: 0.054); (2) nodule size (21.8 ± 7.5 mm vs. 18.3 ± 7.9 mm; p = 0.051); (3) spiculation (73.1% vs. 41.9%; p = 0.024); (4) solidity (84.9% vs. 62.8%; p = 0.004); (5) size dynamics (6.4 ± 7.7 mm/3 months vs. 0.2 ± 0.9 mm/3 months; p < 0.0001); (6) smoking history (92.0% vs. 43.9%; p < 0.0001); (7) pack years (35.1 ± 19.1 vs. 21.3 ± 18.8; p = 0.079); and (8) cancer history (34.9% vs. 24.3%; p = 0.052). Our model demonstrated superior precision to that of the Mayo score (p = 0.013) with an overall correct classification of 96.0%, a calibration (observed/expected-ratio) of 1.1, and a discrimination (ROC analysis) of AUC (95% CI) 0.94 (0.92-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on essential parameters, LIONS PREY can be easily and reproducibly applied based on computed tomography (CT) scans. Multidisciplinary team members could use it to facilitate decision making. Patients may find it easier to consent to surgery knowing the likelihood of pulmonary malignancy. The LIONS PREY app is available for free on Android and iOS devices.
