Modern fluid management in thoracic surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an approach to perioperative fluid management for lung resection patients that incorporates the entire patient pathway in the context of international guidelines on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). RECENT FINDINGS: The concern with intraoperative fluid management is that giving too little or too much fluid is associated with worse outcomes after lung resection. However, it has not emerged as a key care element in thoracic ERAS programs probably due to the influence of other ERAS elements. Carbohydrate loading 2 h before surgery and the allowance of water until just prior to induction ensures the patient is both well hydrated and metabolically normal when they enter the operating room. Consequently, maintaining a euvolemic state during anesthesia can be achieved without goal-directed fluid therapy despite the recommendations of some guidelines. Intravenous fluids can be safely stopped in the immediate postoperative period. SUMMARY: The goal of perioperative euvolemia can be achieved with the ongoing evolution and application of ERAS principles. A focus on the pre and postoperative phases of fluid management and a pragmatic approach to intraoperative fluid management negates the need for goal-directed fluid therapy in most cases.

Navigating Diagnostic and Treatment Decisions in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Expert Commentary on the Multidisciplinary Team Approach.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately one in five cancer-related deaths, and management requires increasingly complex decision making by health care professionals. Many centers have therefore adopted a multidisciplinary approach to patient care, using the expertise of various specialists to provide the best evidence-based, personalized treatment. However, increasingly complex disease staging, as well as expanded biomarker testing and multimodality management algorithms with novel therapeutics, have driven the need for multifaceted, collaborative decision making to optimally guide the overall treatment process. To keep up with the rapidly evolving treatment landscape, national-level guidelines have been introduced to standardize patient pathways and ensure prompt diagnosis and treatment. Such strategies depend on efficient and effective communication between relevant multidisciplinary team members and have both improved adherence to treatment guidelines and extended patient survival. This article highlights the value of a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and staging, treatment decision making, and adverse event management in NSCLC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This review highlights the value of a multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and makes practical suggestions as to how multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can be best deployed at individual stages of the disease to improve patient outcomes and effectively manage common adverse events. The authors discuss how a collaborative approach, appropriately leveraging the diverse expertise of NSCLC MDT members (including specialist radiation and medical oncologists, chest physicians, pathologists, pulmonologists, surgeons, and nursing staff) can continue to ensure optimal per-patient decision making as treatment options become ever more specialized in the era of biomarker-driven therapeutic strategies.

Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life of Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) approaches are increasingly used in lung cancer surgery, but little is known about their impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL). This prospective study measured recovery and HRQL in the year after VATS for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and explored the feasibility of HRQL data collection in patients undergoing VATS or open lung resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for surgical assessment (VATS or open surgery) for proven/suspected NSCLC completed HRQL and fatigue assessments before and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Mean HRQL scores were calculated for patients who underwent VATS (segmental, wedge or lobectomy resection). Paired t-tests compared mean HRQL between baseline and expected worst (1 month), early (3 months) and longer-term (12 months) recovery time points. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients received VATS, and 18 open surgery. Questionnaire response rates were high (pre-surgery 96-100%; follow-up 67-85%). Pre-surgery, VATS patients reported mostly high (good) functional health scores [(European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer) EORTC function scores > 80] and low (mild) symptom scores (EORTC symptom scores < 20). One-month post-surgery, patients reported clinically and statistically significant deterioration in overall health and physical, role and social function (19-36 points), and increased fatigue, pain, dyspnoea, appetite loss and constipation [EORTC 12-26; multidimensional fatigue inventory (MFI-20) 3-5]. HRQL had not fully recovered 12 months post-surgery, with reduced physical, role and social function (10-14) and persistent fatigue and dyspnoea (EORTC 12-22; MFI-20 2.7-3.2). CONCLUSIONS: Lung resection has a considerable detrimental impact on patients' HRQL that is not fully resolved 12 months post-surgery, despite a VATS approach.

Digital pathology is a practical alternative to on-site intraoperative frozen section diagnosis in thoracic surgery.

AIMS: Telepathology uses digitised image transfer to allow off-site reporting of histopathology slides. This technology could facilitate the centralisation of pathology services, which may improve their quality and cost-effectiveness. The benefits may be most apparent in frozen section reporting, in which turnaround times (TATs) are vital. We moved from on-site to off-site telepathology reporting of thoracic surgery frozen section specimens in 2016. The aim of this study was to compare TATs before and after this service change. METHODS AND RESULTS: All thoracic frozen section specimens analysed 4 months prior and 4 months following the service change were included. Demographics, operation, sample type, time taken from theatre, time received by laboratory, time reported by laboratory, TAT, frozen section diagnosis, final histopathological diagnosis and final TNM staging were recorded. The results were analysed with spss statistical software version 24. In total, there were 65 samples from 59 patients; 34 before the change and 31 after the change. Specimens included 51 lung, six lymph node, three bronchial, three chest wall and two pleural biopsies. Before the change, the median TAT was 25 min [interquartile range (IQR) 20-33 min]. No diagnoses were deferred. No diagnoses were changed on subsequent paraffin analysis. After the change, with the use of digital pathology, the median TAT was 27.5 min (IQR 21.75-38.5 min). This difference was not significant (P = 0.581). Diagnosis was deferred in one case (3.23%). There was one (3.23%) mid-case technical failure resulting in the sample having to be transported by courier, resulting in a TAT of 106 min. No diagnoses were changed on subsequent paraffin analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in reporting times between digital technology and an on-site service, although one sample was affected by a technical failure requiring physical transportation of the specimen for analysis. Our study was underpowered to detect differences in accuracy.

Prophylactic radiotherapy for the prevention of procedure-tract metastases after surgical and large-bore pleural procedures in malignant pleural mesothelioma (SMART): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of prophylactic radiotherapy to prevent procedure-tract metastases (PTMs) in malignant pleural mesothelioma remains controversial, and clinical practice varies worldwide. We aimed to compare prophylactic radiotherapy with deferred radiotherapy (given only when a PTM developed) in a suitably powered trial. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial in 22 UK hospitals of patients with histocytologically proven mesothelioma who had undergone large-bore pleural interventions in the 35 days prior to recruitment. Eligible patients were randomised (1:1), using a computer-generated sequence, to receive immediate radiotherapy (21 Gy in three fractions within 42 days of the pleural intervention) or deferred radiotherapy (same dose given within 35 days of PTM diagnosis). Randomisation was minimised by histological subtype, surgical versus non-surgical procedure, and pleural procedure (indwelling pleural catheter vs other). The primary outcome was the incidence of PTM within 7 cm of the site of pleural intervention within 12 months from randomisation, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN72767336. FINDINGS: Between Dec 23, 2011, and Aug 4, 2014, we randomised 203 patients to receive immediate radiotherapy (n=102) or deferred radiotherapy (n=101). The patients were well matched at baseline. No significant difference was seen in PTM incidence in the immediate and deferred radiotherapy groups (nine [9%] vs 16 [16%]; odds ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·19-1·32]; p=0·14). The only serious adverse event related to a PTM or radiotherapy was development of a painful PTM within the radiotherapy field that required hospital admission for symptom control in one patient who received immediate radiotherapy. Common adverse events of immediate radiotherapy were skin toxicity (grade 1 in 50 [54%] and grade 2 in four [4%] of 92 patients vs grade 1 in three [60%] and grade 2 in two [40%] of five patients in the deferred radiotherapy group who received radiotherapy for a PTM) and tiredness or lethargy (36 [39%] in the immediate radiotherapy group vs two [40%] in the deferred radiotherapy group) within 3 months of receiving radiotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Routine use of prophylactic radiotherapy in all patients with mesothelioma after large-bore thoracic interventions is not justified. FUNDING: Research for Patient Benefit Programme from the UK National Institute for Health Research.

National survey of enhanced recovery after thoracic surgery practice in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Evidence that Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery (ERAS) improves clinical outcomes is growing. Following the recent publications of the international ERAS guidelines in Thoracic surgery, the aim of this audit was to capture variation and perceived difficulties to ERAS implementation, thus helping its development at a national level. METHODS: We designed an anonymous online survey and distributed it via email to all 36 centres that perform lung lobectomy surgery in the UK and Ireland. It included 38 closed, open and multiple-choice questions on the core elements of ERAS and took an average of 10 min to complete. RESULTS: Eighty-two healthcare professionals from 34 out of 36 centres completed the survey; majority were completed by consultant thoracic surgeons (57%). Smoking cessation support varied and only 37% of individuals implemented the recommended period for fluid fasting; 59% screen patients for malnutrition and 60% do not give preoperative carbohydrate loading. The compliance with nerve sparing techniques when a thoracotomy is performed was poor (22%). 66% of respondents apply suction on intercostal drains and although 91% refer all lobectomies for physiotherapeutic assessment, the physiotherapy adjuncts varied across centres. Perceived barriers to implementation were staffing levels, lack of teamwork/consistency, limited resources over weekend and the reduced access to smoking cessation services. CONCLUSION: Centres across the UK are working to develop the ERAS pathway. This survey aids this process by providing insight into "real life" ERAS, increasing exposure of staff to the ESTS- ERAS recommendations and identifying barriers to implementation.

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after lung surgery: recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS).

Enhanced recovery after surgery is well established in specialties such as colorectal surgery. It is achieved through the introduction of multiple evidence-based perioperative measures that aim to diminish postoperative organ dysfunction while facilitating recovery. This review aims to present consensus recommendations for the optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing thoracic surgery (principally lung resection). A systematic review of meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, large non-randomized studies and reviews was conducted for each protocol element. Smaller prospective and retrospective cohort studies were considered only when higher-level evidence was unavailable. The quality of the evidence base was graded by the authors and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. Development of these recommendations was endorsed by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Society and the European Society for Thoracic Surgery. Recommendations were developed for a total of 45 enhanced recovery items covering topics related to preadmission, admission, intraoperative care and postoperative care. Most are based on good-quality studies. In some instances, good-quality data were not available, and subsequent recommendations are generic or based on data extrapolated from other specialties. In other cases, no recommendation can currently be made because either equipoise exists or there is a lack of available evidence. Recommendations are based not only on the quality of the evidence but also on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects. Key recommendations include preoperative counselling, nutritional screening, smoking cessation, prehabilitation for high-risk patients, avoidance of fasting, carbohydrate loading, avoidance of preoperative sedatives, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, prevention of hypothermia, short-acting anaesthetics to facilitate early emergence, regional anaesthesia, nausea and vomiting control, opioid-sparing analgesia, euvolemic fluid management, minimally invasive surgery, early chest drain removal, avoidance of urinary catheters and early mobilization after surgery. These guidelines outline recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing lung surgery based on the best available evidence. As the recommendation grade for most of the elements is strong, the use of a systematic perioperative care pathway has the potential to improve outcomes after surgery.

The impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol compliance on morbidity from resection for primary lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The adoption of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programs in thoracic surgery is relatively recent with limited outcome data. This study aimed to determine the impact of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway on morbidity and length of stay in patients undergoing lung resection for primary lung cancer. METHODS: This prospective cohort study collected data on consecutive patients undergoing lung resection for primary lung cancer between April 2012 and June 2014 at a regional referral center in the United Kingdom. All patients followed a standardized, 15-element Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol. Key data fields included protocol compliance with individual elements, pathophysiology, and operative factors. Thirty-day morbidity was taken as the primary outcome measure and classified a priori according to the Clavien-Dindo system. Logistic regression models were devised to identify independent risk factors for morbidity and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 422 consecutive patients underwent lung resection over a 2-year period, of whom 302 (71.6%) underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Lobectomy was performed in 297 patients (70.4%). Complications were experienced by 159 patients (37.6%). The median length of stay was 5 days (range, 1-67), and 6 patients (1.4%) died within 30 days of surgery. There was a significant inverse relationship between protocol compliance and morbidity after adjustment for confounding factors (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.91; P < .01). Age, lobectomy or pneumonectomy, more than 1 resection, and delayed mobilization were independent predictors of morbidity. Age, lack of preoperative carbohydrate drinks, planned high dependency unit/intensive therapy unit admission, delayed mobilization, and open approach were independent predictors of delayed discharge (length of stay >5 days). CONCLUSIONS: Increased compliance with an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway is associated with improved clinical outcomes after resection for primary lung cancer. Several elements, including early mobilization, appear to be more influential than others.

Pain and recovery are comparable after either uniportal or multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: an observation study.

OBJECTIVES: Uniportal approaches to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy have been described in significant series. Few comparison studies between the two techniques exist. The aim was to determine whether the uniportal technique had more favourable postoperative outcomes than the multiport technique. METHODS: All VATS lobectomies undertaken at a single university hospital during August 2012 to December 2013 were studied. Patients with preoperative opiate use or chronic pain were excluded. Patients were divided into those with uniportal and multiport approaches for analysis. All continuous data were assessed for normality, and analysed with the Mann-Whitney U-tests or t-tests as appropriate. Categorical data were analysed by Fisher's exact or χ(2) test for trend as appropriate. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine VATS lobectomies were completed. Six were excluded and data were incomplete for 13, leaving 110 (15 uniportal, 95 multiport) for analysis. The demographics of the two groups were similar. There was no significant difference in the Thoracoscore or American Society of Anesthesiologists grades. The median morphine use in the first 24 postoperative hours was 19 mg in the uniportal group and 23 mg in the multiport group, P = 0.84. The median visual analogue pain score in the first 24 h was 0 in the uniportal group and 0 in the multiport group, P = 0.65. There was no difference in the duration of patient-controlled analgesia (P = 0.97), chest drain duration (P = 0.67) or hospital length of stay (P = 0.54). There was no inpatient mortality and no unplanned admission to critical care in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Uniportal VATS lobectomy is safe, and there is no appreciable negative impact on the hospital stay or morbidity. Patient-reported pain and morphine use in the first 24 h was low with either technique. Larger prospective studies are needed to quantify any benefit to a particular approach for VATS lobectomy.

A Novel Cause of Acute Coronary Syndrome Due to Dynamic Extrinsic Coronary Artery Compression by a Rib Exostosis: Multimodality Imaging Diagnosis.

We report a case of acute coronary syndrome secondary to intermittent extrinsic compression of the left anterior descending coronary artery by inward-pointing rib exostosis in an 18-year-old woman during forceful repeated expiration in labour. The diagnosis was achieved using multimodality noninvasive cardiac imaging. In particular, we demonstrated the novel role of expiratory-phase cardiac computed tomography in confirming the anatomical relationship of the bony exostosis to the left anterior descending coronary artery. The case reminds us the heart and mediastinum move dynamically, relative to the bony thorax, throughout the respiratory cycle, and that changes in cardiac physiology in pregnancy may become pathological.

Protocol for the surgical and large bore procedures in malignant pleural mesothelioma and radiotherapy trial (SMART Trial): an RCT evaluating whether prophylactic radiotherapy reduces the incidence of procedure tract metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) may develop painful 'procedure tract metastasis' (PTM) at the site of previous pleural interventions. Prophylactic radiotherapy has been used to minimise this complication; however, three small randomised trials have shown conflicting results regarding its effectiveness. The surgical and large bore procedures in malignant pleural mesothelioma and radiotherapy trial (SMART Trial) is a suitably powered, multicentre, randomised controlled trial, designed to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic radiotherapy within 42 days of pleural instrumentation in preventing the development of PTM in MPM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 203 patients with a histocytologically proven diagnosis of MPM, who have undergone a large bore pleural intervention (thoracic surgery, large bore chest drain, indwelling pleural catheter or local anaesthetic thoracoscopy) in the previous 35 days, will be recruited from UK hospitals. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to receive immediate radiotherapy (21 Gy in 3 fractions over 3 working days within 42 days of the pleural intervention) or deferred radiotherapy (21 Gy in 3 fractions over 3 working days given if a PTM develops). Patients will be followed up for 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the rate of PTM until death or 12 months (whichever is sooner), as defined by the presence of a clinically palpable nodule of at least 1 cm diameter felt within 7 cm of the margins of the procedure site as confirmed by two assessors. Secondary outcome measures include chest pain, quality of life, analgaesic requirements, healthcare utilisation and safety (including radiotherapy toxicity). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has received ethical approval from the Southampton B Research Ethics Committee (11/SC/0408). There is a Trial Steering Committee, including independent members and a patient and public representative. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN72767336.