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.

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.

Proactive Recruitment Strategy for Patient Identification for Lung Cancer Screening.

PURPOSE: We assessed low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer using a proactive patient education/recruitment program. METHODS: We identified patients aged 55-80 years from a family medicine group. In the retrospective phase (March-August, 2019), patients were categorized as current/former/never smokers, and screening eligibility was determined. Patients who underwent LDCT in the past year, along with outcomes, were documented. In the prospective phase (2020), patients in the same cohort who did not undergo LDCT were proactively contacted by a nurse navigator to discuss eligibility and prescreening. Eligible and willing patients were referred to their primary care physician. RESULTS: In the retrospective phase, of 451 current/former smokers, 184 (40.8%) were eligible for LDCT, 104 (23.1%) were ineligible, and 163 (36.1%) had an incomplete smoking history. Of those eligible, 34 (18.5%) had LDCT ordered. In the prospective phase, 189 (41.9%) were eligible for LDCT (150 [79.4%] of whom had no prior LDCT or diagnostic CT), 106 (23.5%) were ineligible, and 156 (34.6%) had an incomplete smoking history. The nurse navigator identified an additional 56/451 (12.4%) patients as eligible after contacting patients with incomplete smoking history. In total, 206 patients (45.7%) were eligible, an increase of 37.3% compared with the retrospective phase (150). Of these, 122 (59.2%) verbally agreed to screening, 94 (45.6%) met with their physician, and 42 (20.4%) were prescribed LDCT. CONCLUSIONS: A proactive education/recruitment model increased eligible patients for LDCT by 37.3%. Proactive identification/education of patients desiring to pursue LDCT was 59.2%. It is essential to identify strategies that will increase and deliver LDCT screening among eligible and willing patients.

Blastomycosis Presenting as a Primary Tracheal Tumor: A Rare Presentation.

Blastomycosis is a rare fungal infection that typically presents as a pulmonary infection. Systemic involvement of blastomycosis from the lungs commonly occurs in the skin and bones. Tracheal involvement is an unusual presentation of blastomycosis, which makes it a formidable diagnostic challenge. We herein report an unusual case of an 85-year-old man presenting with tracheal blastomycosis presenting as a primary tracheal tumor. We also highlight the challenges that were faced in the diagnosis of such an uncommon presentation. To the best of our knowledge, this is only the third occurrence of blastomycosis with tracheal involvement.

Randomized Trial of Bupivacaine Versus Liposomal Bupivacaine in Minimally Invasive Lobectomy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this single-blind randomized study is to compare local infiltration of bupivacaine or liposomal bupivacaine (LipoB) in narcotic naïve patients undergoing minimally invasive lobectomy for early stage lung cancer. METHODS: Adult patients without previous lung surgery undergoing minimally invasive lobectomy (robotic or thoracoscopic) for early stage lung cancer were randomly assigned to bupivacaine (with epinephrine 0.25%, 1:200 000) or LipoB 1.3%. Pain level was documented using the visual analog scale and morphine equivalents for narcotic pain medications. Inhospital treatment cost and pharmacy cost were compared. RESULTS: The study enrolled 50 patients (bupivacaine, 24; LipoB, 26). The mean age of patients was 66 years, 94% were non-Hispanic white, and 48% were male. There was no difference in baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Duration of surgery (105 vs 137 minutes, P = .152), chest tube duration (49 vs 55 hours, P = .126), and length of stay (2.45 vs 3.28 days, P = .326) were similar between treatments. Inhospital morphine equivalents were 42.7 mg vs 48 mg (P = .714), and the median pain score was 5.2 vs 4.75 (P = .602) for bupivacaine vs LipoB, respectively. There was no difference in narcotic use at 2 to 4 weeks (57.1% [12 of 21] vs 54.5% [12 of 22], P = 1.00), and at 6 months (5.9% [1 of 17] vs 9.5% [2 of 21], P = 1.00) after surgery. The overall cost ($20 252 vs $22 775, P = .225) was similar; however, pharmacy cost for LipoB was higher ($1052 vs $596, P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In narcotic naïve patients undergoing minimally invasive lobectomy, short-term narcotic use, postoperative pain scores, length of stay, and long-term narcotic use were similar between bupivacaine and LipoB.

Consensus for Thoracoscopic Lower Lobectomy: Essential Components and Targets for Simulation.

BACKGROUND: Despite demonstration of its clear benefits relative to open approaches, a video-assisted thoracic surgery technique for pulmonary lobectomy has not been universally adopted. This study aims to overcome potential barriers by establishing the essential components of the operation and determining which steps are most useful for simulation training. METHODS: After randomly selecting experienced thoracic surgeons to participate, an initial list of components to a lower lobectomy was distributed. Feedback was provided by the participants, and modifications were made based on anonymous responses in a Delphi process. Components were declared essential once at least 80% of participants came to an agreement. The steps were then rated based on cognitive and technical difficulty followed by listing the components most appropriate for simulation. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting 18 components were identified as essential to performance of a video-assisted thoracic surgery for lower lobectomy. The components deemed the most difficult were isolation and division of the basilar and superior segmental branches of the pulmonary artery, isolation and division of the lower lobe bronchus, and dissection of lymphovascular tissue to expose the target bronchus. The steps determined to be most amenable for simulation were isolation and division of the branches of the pulmonary artery, the lower lobe bronchus, and the inferior pulmonary vein. CONCLUSIONS: Using a Delphi process a list of essential components for a video-assisted thoracic surgery for lower lobectomy was established. Furthermore 3 components were identified as most appropriate for simulation-based training, providing insights for future simulation development.

Life Expectancy and Rate of Decline After Lung Volume Reduction Surgery.

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) patient selection guidelines are based on the National Emphysema Treatment Trial. Because of increased mortality and poor improvement in functional outcomes, patients with non-upper lobe emphysema and low baseline exercise capacity are determined as poor candidates for LVRS. In well-selected patients with heterogeneous emphysema, LVRS has a durable long-term outcome at up to 5-years of follow-up. Five-year survival rates in patients range between 63% and 78%. LVRS seems a durable alternative for end-stage heterogeneous emphysema in patients not eligible for lung transplantation. Future studies will help identify eligible patients with homogeneous emphysema for LVRS.

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.

Pulmonary Hypertension: A Contraindication for Lung Volume Reduction Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Historically, pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been considered as one of the contraindications for lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). Newer studies have shown that LVRS is successful in select emphysema patients with PH. METHODS: In-hospital and 1-year functional and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were studied in patients with PH post-LVRS. PH was defined as pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) exceeding 35 mm Hg by right heart catheterization (RHC), where available, or else exceeding 35 mm Hg by echocardiogram. RESULTS: Of 124 patients who underwent LVRS, 56 (45%) had PH (mean PAP, 41 mm Hg) with 48 mild to moderate and 8 severe PH. In-hospital outcomes were similar between patients with and without PH: hours of artificial ventilation (1.8 vs 0.06, P = .882), days in intensive care (4 vs 6, P = .263), prolonged air leak (12% vs 19%, P = .402), and days of hospital stay (13 vs 16, P = .072). Lung function improved significantly at the 1-year follow-up in patients with PH: forced expiratory volume in 1 second % predicted (26 vs 38, P = .001), forced vital capacity % (62 vs 90, P = .001), residual volume % predicted (224 vs 174, P = .001), diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide % predicted (36 vs 43, P = .001), 6-minute walk distance test (1104 vs 1232 feet, P = .001), and QOL utility scores (0.67 vs 0.77, P = .001). There were no differences in in-hospital, baseline, and follow-up functional and QOL outcomes between patients with and without PH. CONCLUSIONS: In this small, single-institution cohort, outcomes of patients undergoing LVRS for emphysema with PH were similar to those of patients without PH. LVRS may be a potential option for select emphysema patients with PH.

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.

Clinical and Quality of Life Outcomes After Lung Volume Reduction Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is the definitive treatment for patients with severe emphysema. There is still a need for long-term data concerning the outcomes of this procedure. This study presents long-term longitudinal data on LVRS including correlation of quality of life (QOL) with pulmonary function testing metrics and includes additional analysis of patients with heterogeneous and homogeneous emphysema. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data collected from patients undergoing LVRS over a 9-year period at a single center was performed (N = 93). Pulmonary function and 6-minute walk tests as well as QOL questionnaires were administered before and 1 year after surgery. Descriptive statistics were reported for clinical outcomes and QOL indices. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to examine changes from baseline to end of 1-year follow-up. Spearman correlation coefficients were used to evaluate relationships between clinical and QOL outcomes. RESULTS: At 1-year post surgery, mean forced vital capacity (46%, P ≤ .0001), forced expiratory volume (43%, P ≤ .0001), diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (16%, P ≤ .0001), and 6-minute walk distance (20%, P ≤ .0001) were increased from baseline, while residual volume decreased (23%, P ≤ .0001). There was a positive correlation between changes in QOL and forced expiratory volume, forced vital capacity, and, 6-minute walk distance. Patients having heterogeneous disease had greater improvements in forced expiratory volume, forced vital capacity, residual volume, and diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide, and greater QOL compared with patients with homogeneous disease. CONCLUSIONS: LVRS continues to be a valuable treatment option for patients with advanced emphysema with reproducible improvements in clinical and QOL metrics. Careful patient selection and optimization prior to surgery are crucial to successful outcomes.

Comparison between the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D quality of life (QOL) questionnaires in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) undergoing lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS).

PURPOSE: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been shown to improve lung function, but also improve the overall quality of life (QOL). The aim of this study is to compare two QOL questionnaires-EuroQol Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) in patients post-LVRS. METHODS: All patients undergoing LVRS for severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at a single center of excellence were analyzed (n = 94). Baseline demographic and clinical outcomes were characterized. Both EQ-5D-3L and SF-36 questionnaires were administered to all patients at baseline (n = 94) and at the end of 1 year (n = 89) post-surgery. SF-36 was converted to Short Form six-dimensions (SF-6D) using standard algorithm. Correlation, discrimination, responsiveness and differences across the two questionnaires were examined. RESULTS: The mean age of patients enrolled in the cohort was 66 years. There was significant increase in forced expiratory volume (FEV1, 43%), forced vital capacity (FVC 46%), diffusion capacity (DLCO 15%), 6 min walk distance test (6MWD 21%) and a significant decrease in residual volume (RV 23%) at the end of 1-year follow-up. The overall mean utility index significantly improved for both SF-6D and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at the end of follow-up (p = 0.0001). However, the magnitude of percentage increase was higher with EQ-5D-3L compared to SF-6D (32% vs. 13%). Stronger correlations confirmed convergent validity at the end of 1-year follow-up between similar domains. Both questionnaires failed to discriminate between different levels of disease severity post-LVRS in patients with severe COPD. CONCLUSIONS: Both questionnaires responded similarly in patients with COPD post-LVRS. Combining results from QOL questionnaire(s) along with symptoms of disease and history of exacerbation may be a possible solution for identifying disease severity in old and sick patients unwilling/unable to come to hospital for a pulmonary function test post-LVRS.

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.