The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Expert Consensus Document on the Management of Pleural Drains After Pulmonary Lobectomy: Expert Consensus Document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Workforce on Evidence-Based Surgery provides this document on management of pleural drains after pulmonary lobectomy. The goal of this consensus document is to provide guidance regarding pleural drains in 5 specific areas: (1) choice of drain, including size, type, and number; (2) management, including use of suction vs water seal and criteria for removal; (3) imaging recommendations, including the use of daily and postpull chest roentgenograms; (4) use of digital drainage systems; and (5) management of prolonged air leak. To formulate the consensus statements, a task force of 15 general thoracic surgeons was invited to review the existing literature on this topic. Consensus was obtained using a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds of voting until 75% agreement on the statements was reached. A total of 13 consensus statements are provided to encourage standardization and stimulate additional research in this important area.

Bronchoscopic Valve Treatment of End-Stage Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Endobronchial valve therapy has evolved over the past decade, with demonstration of significant improvements in pulmonary function, 6-minute walk distance, and quality of life in patients with end-stage chronic obstructive lung disease. Appropriate patient selection is crucial, with identification of the most diseased lobe and of a target lobe with minimal to no collateral ventilation. Endobronchial valve therapy typically is utilized in patients with heterogeneous disease but may be indicated in select patients with homogeneous disease. Morbidity and mortality have been lower than historically reported with lung volume reduction surgery, but complications related to pneumothoraces remain a challenge.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database: 2019 Update on Research.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Workforce on Research Development and the STS Research Center currently offer 3 outcomes research platforms using the STS General Thoracic Surgery Database: (1) the traditional Access and Publications Program supports STS-sponsored projects with data analysis conducted at an STS-approved data analytic center, (2) the STS Task Force for Funded Research supports STS investigators pursuing extramural research funding for projects incorporating STS National Database data linked to other data sets such as Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and (3) the Participant User File (PUF) program that provides deidentified patient-level data files from the STS General Thoracic Surgery Database to investigators with approved projects to be analyzed at their institution. This report includes an updated review of each program in addition to an outline of 2019-based articles published or accepted.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Rib Fractures.

Rib fractures are the most common thoracic injury after minor blunt trauma. Although rib fractures can produce significant morbidity, the diagnosis of injuries to underlying organs is arguably more important as these complications are likely to have the most significant clinical impact. Isolated rib fractures have a relatively low morbidity and mortality and treatment is generally conservative. As such, evaluation with standard chest radiographs is usually sufficient for the diagnosis of rib fractures, and further imaging is generally not appropriate as there is little data that undiagnosed isolated rib fractures after minor blunt trauma affect management or outcomes. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation frequently results in anterior rib fractures and chest radiographs are usually appropriate (and sufficient) as the initial imaging modality in these patients. In patients with suspected pathologic fractures, chest CT or Tc-99m bone scans are usually appropriate and complementary modalities to chest radiography based on the clinical scenario. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Office-Based Spirometry: A New Model of Care in Preoperative Assessment for Low-Risk Lung Resections.

BACKGROUND: Formal pulmonary function testing with laboratory spirometry (LS) is the standard of care for risk stratification before lung resection. LS and handheld office spirometry (OS) are clinically comparable for forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity. We investigated the safety of preoperative risk stratification based solely on OS. METHODS: Patients at low-risk for cardiopulmonary complications were enrolled in a single-center prospective study and underwent preoperative OS. Formal LS was not performed when forced expiratory volume in 1 second was more than 60% by OS. Propensity score matching was used to compare patients in the OS group to low-risk institutional database patients (2008 to 2015) who underwent LS and lung resection. Standardized mean differences determined model covariate balance. The McNemar test and log-rank test were performed, respectively, for categorical and continuous paired outcome data. RESULTS: There were 66 prospectively enrolled patients who received OS and underwent pulmonary resection, and 1,290 patients received preoperative LS, resulting in 52 propensity score-matched pairs (83%). There were no deaths and two 30-day readmissions per group. The major morbidity risk was similar in each group (7.7%). All analyses of discordant pair morbidity had p exceeding 0.56. There was no association between length of stay and exposure to OS vs LS (p = 0.31). The estimated annual institutional cost savings from performing OS only and avoiding LS was $38,000. CONCLUSIONS: Low-risk patients undergoing lung resection can be adequately and safely assessed using OS without formal LS, with significant cost savings. With upcoming bundled care reimbursement paradigms, such safe and effective strategies are likely to be more widely used.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Respiratory Illness in Immunocompetent Patients.

Acute respiratory illness, defined as cough, sputum production, chest pain, and/or dyspnea (with or without fever), is a major public health issue, accounting for millions of doctor office and emergency department visits every year. While most cases are due to self-limited viral infections, a significant number of cases are due to more serious respiratory infections where delay in diagnosis can lead to morbidity and mortality. Imaging plays a key role in the initial diagnosis and management of acute respiratory illness. This study reviews the current literature concerning the appropriate role of imaging in the diagnosis and management of the immunocompetent adult patient initially presenting with acute respiratory illness. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Chronic Dyspnea-Noncardiovascular Origin.

Chronic dyspnea may result from a variety of disorders of cardiovascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, neuromuscular, systemic, and psychogenic etiology. This article discusses guidelines for the initial imaging of six variants for chronic dyspnea of noncardiovascular origin: (1) Chronic dyspnea of unclear etiology; (2) Chronic dyspnea with suspected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; (3) Chronic dyspnea with suspected central airways disease; (4) Chronic dyspnea with suspected interstitial lung disease; (5) Chronic dyspnea with suspected disease of the pleura or chest wall; and (6) Chronic dyspnea with suspected diaphragm dysfunction. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Lung Cancer Screening.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in both men and women. Smoking is the single greatest risk factor for the development of lung cancer. For patients between the age of 55 and 80 with 30 or more pack years smoking history who currently smoke or who have quit within the last 15 years should undergo lung cancer screening with low-dose CT. In patients who do not meet these criteria but who have additional risk factors for lung cancer, lung cancer screening with low-dose CT is controversial but may be appropriate. Imaging is not recommended for lung cancer screening of patient younger than 50 years of age or patients older than 80 years of age or patients of any age with less than 20 packs per year history of smoking and no additional risk factor (ie, radon exposure, occupational exposure, cancer history, family history of lung cancer, history of COPD, or history of pulmonary fibrosis). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Defining the Ideal Time Interval Between Planned Induction Therapy and Surgery for Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Induction therapy leads to significant improvement in survival for selected patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer. The ideal time interval between induction therapy and surgery remains unknown. METHODS: Clinical stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving induction therapy and surgery were identified in the National Cancer Database. Delayed surgery was defined as greater than or equal to 3 months after starting induction therapy. A logistic regression model identified variables associated with delayed surgery. Cox proportional hazards modeling and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed to evaluate variables independently associated with overall survival. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2010, 1,529 of 2,380 (64.2%) received delayed surgery. Delayed surgery patients were older (61.2 ± 10.0 years versus 60.3 ± 9.2; p = 0.03), more likely to be non-white (12.4% versus 9.7%; p = 0.046), and less likely to have private insurance (50% versus 58.2%; p = 0.002). Delayed surgery patients were also more likely to have a sublobar resection (6.3% versus 2.9%). On multivariate analysis, age greater than 68 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 1.7) was associated with delayed surgery, whereas white race (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.99) and private insurance status (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99) were associated with early surgery. Delayed surgery was associated with higher risk of long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed surgery after induction therapy for stage IIIA lung cancer is associated with shorter survival, and is influenced by both social and physiologic factors. Prospective work is needed to further characterize the relationship between patient comorbidities and functional status with receipt of timely surgery.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Is Associated With Improved Survival in Locally Invasive Node Negative Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study are to explore factors that are associated with use of adjuvant chemotherapy and to evaluate its impact on overall survival in node-negative patients who undergo lung and chest wall resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients who underwent concomitant lung and chest wall resection for NSCLC were abstracted from the National Cancer Database. Clinical, pathologic, treatment, and follow-up data were obtained. Patients with pathologic nodal metastases or patients who received any radiation treatment were excluded, and the cohort was dichotomized based on administration of adjuvant postoperative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2010, 824 patients met the inclusion criteria. This cohort exclusively consisted of pT3 N0 patients who did not receive any induction treatment or adjuvant radiation treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 255 patients (31%). Patients in the chemotherapy group were younger and had shorter inpatient length of stay. Both groups had similar comorbidities, tumor size, unplanned readmission rate, and incomplete resection rate. In multivariable analysis, younger age and shorter length of stay were associated with a greater likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI: 0.6 to 0.9), whereas increasing age, white race, length of inpatient stay, tumor size, and residual tumor were independently associated with greater risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo lobectomy with chest wall resection for locally advanced NSCLC should be strongly considered for postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy even in the absence of nodal disease. Actual selection of patients for adjuvant chemotherapy is affected by perioperative factors.

Adjuvant Therapy for Positive Nodes After Induction Therapy and Resection of Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The value of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with positive lymph nodes (+LNs) after induction therapy and resection of esophageal cancer is controversial. This study assesses survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this cohort. METHODS: We analyzed our single-institution database for patients with +LNs after induction therapy and resection of primary esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2013. Factors associated with survival were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 101 of 764 esophagectomy patients received induction and had +LNs on final pathologic examination. Forty-five also received adjuvant therapy: 37 of 45 (82%) received chemotherapy alone, 1 of 45 (2%) received radiation alone, and 7 of 45 (16%) received both. Pathologic stage was IIB in 21 (47%), IIIA in 19 (42%), and IIIB in 5 (11%). In 56 node-positive patients with induction but not adjuvant therapy, pathologic stage was IIB in 28 (50%), IIIA in 18 (32%), IIIB in 7 (13%), and IIIC in 3 (5%). Neither age nor comorbidity score differed between cohorts. Adjuvant patients experienced a shorter hospital length of stay (mean, 10 days [range, 6 to 33 days] versus 11 days [range, 7 to 67 days]; p = 0.03]. Median survival favored the adjuvant group: 24.0 months (95% confidence interval, 16.6 to 32.2 months) versus 18.0 months (95% confidence interval, 11.1 to 25.0 months); p = 0.033). Multivariate Cox regression identified adjuvant therapy, length of stay, and number of +LNs as influential for survival. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal management of node-positive patients after induction therapy and esophagectomy remains unclear, but in this series, adjuvant therapy, length of stay, and number of +LNs impacted survival. A prospective trial may reduce potential bias and guide the evaluation of adjuvant therapy in this patient population.

Pneumonectomy for Clinical Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The role of pneumonectomy after neoadjuvant therapy for stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains uncertain. METHODS: Patients who underwent pneumonectomy for clinical stage IIIA NSCLC were abstracted from the National Cancer Database. Individuals treated with neoadjuvant therapy, followed by resection, were compared with those who underwent resection, followed by adjuvant therapy. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with 30-day mortality. A Cox proportional hazards model was fitted to identify factors associated with survival. RESULTS: Pneumonectomy for stage IIIA NSCLC with R0 resection was performed in 1,033 patients; of these, 739 (71%) received neoadjuvant therapy, and 294 (29%) underwent resection, followed by adjuvant therapy. The two groups were well matched for age, gender, race, income, Charlson comorbidity score, and tumor size. The 30-day mortality rate in the neoadjuvant group was 7.8% (57 of 739). Median survival was similar between the two groups: 25.9 months neoadjuvant vs 31.3 months adjuvant (p = 0.74). A multivariable logistic regression model for 30-day mortality demonstrated that increasing age, annual income of less than $35,000, nonacademic facility, and right-sided resection were associated with an elevated risk of 30-day mortality. A multivariable Cox model for survival demonstrated that increasing age was predictive of shorter survival and that administration of neoadjuvant therapy did not confer a survival advantage over adjuvant therapy (p = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who require pneumonectomy for clinical stage IIIA NSCLC receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, without an improvement in survival. In these patients, primary resection, followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, may provide equivalent long-term outcomes.

Patterns of care in hilar node-positive (N1) non-small cell lung cancer: A missed treatment opportunity?

BACKGROUND: For patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) metastatic to hilar lymph nodes (N1), guidelines recommend surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy in operable patients and chemoradiation (CRT) for those deemed inoperable. It is unclear how these recommendations are applied nationally, however. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried to identify patients with a tumor <7 cm (T1/T2) with clinically positive N1 nodes. Patients undergoing CRT (comprising chemotherapy and radiation >45 Gy) or surgical resection were considered adequately treated. Remaining patients were classified as receiving inadequate or no treatment. RESULTS: Of the 20,366 patients who met the study criteria, 63% underwent adequate treatment (48% surgical resection, 15% CRT). The remainder received inadequate treatment (23%) or no treatment (14%). In univariate analysis, the patients receiving inadequate or no treatment were older, tended to be non-Caucasian, had a lower income, and had a higher comorbidity score. Patients undergoing adequate treatment had improved overall survival (OS) compared with those receiving inadequate or no treatment (median OS, 34.0 months vs 11.7 months; P < .001). Of those receiving adequate treatment, logistic regression identified several variables associated with surgical resection, including treatment at an academic facility, Caucasian race, and annual income >$35,000. Increasing age and T2 stage were associated with nonoperative management. Following propensity score matching of 2308 patient pairs undergoing surgery or CRT, resection was associated with longer median OS (34.1 months vs 22.0 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the established guidelines, many patients with T1-2N1 NSCLC do not receive adequate treatment. Surgery is associated with prolonged survival in selected patients. Surgical input in the multidisciplinary evaluation of these patients should be mandatory.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Routine Chest Radiography.

Chest radiographs are sometimes taken before surgeries and interventional procedures on hospital admissions and outpatients. This manuscript summarizes the American College of Radiology review of the literature and recommendations on routinely performed chest radiographies in these settings. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Unexpected readmission after lung cancer surgery: A benign event?

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to study the incidence, predictors, and implications of unanticipated early postoperative readmission after lung resection for non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for clinical stage I to III non-small cell lung cancer were abstracted from the National Cancer Database. Regression models were fitted to identify predictors of 30-day readmission and to study the association of unplanned readmission with 30-day and long-term survival. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2010, 129,893 patients underwent resection for stage I to III non-small cell lung cancer. Of these, 5624 (4.3%) were unexpectedly readmitted within 30 days. In a multivariate regression model, increasing age, male gender, preoperative radiation, and pneumonectomy (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-2.00) were associated with unexpected readmissions. Longer index hospitalization and higher Charlson comorbidity score were also predictive of readmission. The 30-day mortality for readmitted patients was higher (3.9% vs 2.8%), as was the 90-day mortality (7.0% vs 3.3%, both P < .001). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model of long-term survival, increasing age, higher Charlson comorbidity score, and higher pathologic stage (hazard ratio, for stage III 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-2.29) were associated with greater risk of mortality. Unplanned readmission was independently associated with a higher risk of long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-1.47). The median survival for readmitted patients was significantly shorter (38.7 vs 58.5 months, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned readmissions are not rare after resection for non-small cell lung cancer. Such events are associated with a greater risk of short- and long-term mortality. With the renewed national focus on readmissions and potential financial disincentives, greater resource allocation is needed to identify patients at risk and develop measures to avoid the associated adverse outcomes.

Intraoperative conversion from video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy to open thoracotomy: a study of causes and implications.

OBJECTIVE: To study causes and implications of intraoperative conversion to thoracotomy during video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy. METHODS: We performed an institutional review of patients undergoing lobectomy for known or suspected lung cancer with root cause analysis of every conversion from VATS to open thoracotomy. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2012, 1227 patients underwent lobectomy. Of these, 517 procedures (42%) were completed via VATS, 87 procedures (7%) were converted to open procedures, and 623 procedures (51%) were performed via planned thoracotomy. Patients undergoing thoracotomy were younger and had a higher incidence of prior lung cancers. Planned thoracotomy and conversion group patients had higher clinical T stage than patients in the VATS group, whereas the planned thoracotomy group had higher pathologic stage than patients in the other groups. Postoperative complications were more frequent in patients in the conversion group (46%) than in the VATS group (23%; P < .001), but similar to the open group (42%; P = .56). Validating a previous classification of causes for conversion, 22 out of 87 conversions (25%) were due to vascular causes, 56 conversions (64%) were for anatomy (eg, adhesions or tumor size), and 8 conversions (9%) were the result of lymph nodes. No specific imaging variables predicted conversion. Within the conversion groups, emergent (20 out of 87; 23%) and planned (67 out of 87; 77%) conversion groups were similar in patient and tumor characteristics and incidence of perioperative morbidity. The conversion rate for VATS lobectomy dropped from 21 out of 74 (28%), to 29 out of 194 (15%), to 37 out of 336 (11%) (P < .001) over 3-year intervals. Over the same periods, the proportion of operations started via VATS increased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: With increasing experience, a higher proportion of lobectomy operations can be completed thoracoscopically. VATS should be strongly considered as the initial approach for the majority of patients undergoing lobectomy.