Background: Elective extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is rarely used in thoracic surgery, apart from lung transplantation. The purpose of this study was to summarize our institutional experience with the intraoperative use of veno-venous (VV) ECMO in selected cases of main airway surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 10 patients who underwent main airway surgery with the support of VV-ECMO between June 2013 and August 2022. Results: Surgical procedures included: three carinal resection and reconstruction with complete preservation of the lung parenchyma, one right upper double-sleeve lobectomy and hemi-carinal resection, and one sleeve resection of the left main bronchus after previous right lower bilobectomy, for thoracic malignancies; four tracheal/carinal repair for extensive traumatic laceration; one extended tracheal resection due to post-tracheostomy stenosis in a patient who had previously undergone a left pneumonectomy. The median intraoperative VV-ECMO use was 162.5 minutes. In three cases with complex resection and reconstruction of the carina and in one case of extended post-tracheostomy stenosis and previous pneumonectomy, high-flow VV-ECMO allowed interruption of ventilation for almost 3 hours. In four patients, VV-ECMO was prolonged in the postoperative period to ensure early extubation. There were no perioperative deaths, no complications related to the use of ECMO and no intraoperative change in the planned type of ECMO. Significant complications occurred only in one patient who developed a small anastomotic dehiscence that led to stenosis and required placement of a Montgomery tube. At the median follow-up of 30 months, all 10 patients were still alive. Conclusions: The use of intraoperative VV-ECMO allows safe and precise performance of main airway surgery with minimal postoperative morbidity in patients requiring complex resections and reconstructions and in cases that cannot be managed with conventional ventilation techniques.
BACKGROUND: Sleeve resection is currently the gold standard procedure for centrally located non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Extended sleeve lobectomy (ESL) consists of an atypical bronchoplasty with resection of >1 lobe and carries several technical difficulties compared with simple sleeve lobectomy (SSL). Our study compared the outcomes of ESL and SSL for NSCLC. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, cohort study included 1314 patients who underwent ESL (155 patients) or SSL (1159 patients) between 2000 and 2018. The primary end points were 30-day and 90-day mortality, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and complications. RESULTS: No differences were found between the 2 groups in general characteristics and surgical and survival outcomes. In particular, there were no differences in early and late complication frequency, 30- and 90-day mortality, R status, recurrence, OS (54.26 ± 33.72 months vs 56.42 ± 32.85 months, P = .444), and DFS (46.05 ± 36.14 months vs 47.20 ± 35.78 months, P = .710). Mean tumor size was larger in the ESL group (4.72 ± 2.30 cm vs 3.81 ± 1.78 cm, P < .001). Stage IIIA was the most prevalent stage in ESL group (34.8%), whereas stage IIB was the most prevalent in SSL group (34.3%; P < .001). The multivariate analyses found nodal status was the only independent predictive factor for OS. CONCLUSIONS: ESL gives comparable short- and long-term outcomes to SSL. Appropriate preoperative staging and exclusion of metastases to mediastinal lymph nodes, as well as complete (R0) resection, are essential for good long-term outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Standard sleeve lobectomies are recommended over pneumonectomy (PN), but the efficacy and oncological proficiency of complex sleeve lobectomies (CSLs) have not been completely investigated. The aim of this study was to report our experience in CSL in patients affected by a centrally located non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), comparing all the variables and outcomes with PN. METHODS: From 2014 to 2022, we collected the data of patients who underwent PN and CSL for NSCLC, excluding neuroendocrine tumors, salvage surgery or carinal resection. Regression analysis was used to assess the association between procedures and complications; the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate survival and risk factors of reduced survival. RESULTS: We analyzed n = 38 extended sleeve lobectomies and n= 6 double-sleeve lobectomies (CSL group) and n= 60 PNs. We had a trend toward higher postoperative mortality in the PN group (5% vs. 0%, p = 0.13). Major complications and bronchial fistula developed in 21.7% and 6.8% (p = 0.038) and in 6.7% and 4.5% (p = 0.64), respectively. The right side was identified as risk factor for major complications, whereas age > 70 and PN had a trend of association in multivariable analysis. The median OS was similar between the two groups (p = 0.76) and cancer recurrence was the only significant risk factors of reduced OS. Excluding functionally compromised patients, the OS of CSL was better than that of PN (67% vs. 42%, p = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: Considering that major complications are often associated with mortality after surgery for centrally located NSCLC, CSLs could be considered an alternative to PN while also ensuring comparable survival.
Thymectomy is the gold standard in the treatment of thymic neoplasm and plays a key role in the therapeutic path of myasthenia gravis. For years, sternotomy has been the traditional approach for removing anterior mediastinal lesions, although the robotic thymectomy is now widely performed. The literature is still lacking in papers comparing the two approaches and evaluating long-term oncological and neurological outcomes. This study aims to analyze the postoperative results of open and robotic thymectomy for thymic neoplasms in myasthenic patients. Surgical, oncological and neurological data of myasthenic patients affected by thymic neoplasms and surgically treated with extended thymectomy, both with the open and the robotic approach, in six Italian Thoracic Centers between 2011 and 2021 were evaluated. A total of 213 patients were enrolled in the study: 110 (51.6%) were treated with the open approach, and 103 (48.4%) were treated with robotic surgery. The open surgery, compared with the robotic, presented a shorter operating time (p < 0.001), a higher number of postoperative complications (p = 0.038) and longer postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.006). No other differences were observed in terms of surgical, oncological or neurological outcomes. The robotic approach can be considered safe and feasible, comparable to the open technique, in terms of surgical, oncological and neurological outcomes.
Current guidelines recommend surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The standard treatment for patients with cT1N0 NSCLC has been lobectomy with lymph-node dissection, with sublobar resection used only in patients with inadequate cardio-respiratory reserve, with poor performance status, or who are elderly. In 1995, the Lung Cancer Study Group published the results of a randomized, prospective trial demonstrating the superiority of lobectomy compared with sublobar resection. From then on, wedge resection and segmentectomy were reserved exclusively for patients with poor functional reserve who could not tolerate lobectomy. Therefore, the exact role of segmentectomy has been controversial over the past 20 years. Recently, the randomized controlled trial JCOG0802/WJOG4607L demonstrated that segmentectomy was superior to lobectomy in patients with stage IA NSCLC (<2 cm and CTR < 0.5) in terms of both overall-survival and post-operative lung function. Based on these results, segmentectomy should be considered the standard surgical procedure for this patient group. In 2023, the randomized phase III CALGB 140503 (Alliance) trial demonstrated the efficacy and non-inferiority of sublobar resection, including wedge resection, for clinical stage IA NSCLC with tumor diameter of < 2 cm. This article is a narrative review of the current role of segmentectomy in lung cancer treatment and summarizes the most relevant studies in this context.
Introduction: Awake minimally invasive Uniportal Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery (U-VATS) represents the last challenge in thoracic surgery that could change the future scenario for high comorbidity patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report a single center preliminary experience of awake thoracoscopic uni-portal anatomic and non-anatomic sub-lobar resections in this setting. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data collected on a prospective database of patients undergoing U-VATS awake sub-lobar lung resections for NSCLC between September 2021 and September 2022. Inclusion criteria were clinical stage I disease; contraindication to standard lobectomy due to high respiratory function impairment; general anesthesia considered at high risk based on the American Society of Anesthesiologist score and on the Charlson Comorbidity Index. All patients underwent a standardized awake non-intubated anesthesia protocol approved by our institutional board. Results: They were n = 10 patients: n = 8 wedge resections; n = 2 segmentectomies. We had n = 1 (10%) conversion to standard general anesthesia and n = 1 laryngeal mask support but maintaining spontaneous breathing. N = 5 patients (50%) needed an Intensive Care Unit recovery (mean time = 17.20â h). Mean chest tube duration and Hospital stay were 2.0 and 3.5 days respectively. We did not register 30- days postoperative mortality. Conclusion: Awake thoracic surgery is a feasible technique, and it could be performed also in high comorbidities' patients without a high rate of complications and allows to operate patients that so far were considered borderline for surgery.
OBJECTIVES: The functional impact of thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy in comparison with lower lobectomy has not been investigated in-depth and the aim of this study was to clarify this topic. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed a cohort of patients who underwent surgery between 2015 and 2019 for non-small-cell lung cancer, peripherally located lung nodules, far enough from both the apical segment and the lobar hilum to allow an oncologically safe thoracoscopic lower lobectomy or basal segmentectomy. Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) including spirometry and plethysmography were performed 1 month after surgery and forced expiratory volume in 1 s, forced vital capacity (FVC) and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) were collected; the difference, the loss and the recovery rate of pulmonary function were calculated and compared with the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: During the study period, n = 45 and n = 16 patients for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lower lobectomy and for VATS basal segmentectomy, respectively, completed the study protocol: the 2 groups were homogeneous as to preoperative variables and PFT values. Postoperative outcomes were similar and PFTs revealed significant differences between postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 s %, FVC%, ΔFVC and ΔFVC%. The loss percentage of FVC%, DLCO% and the recovery rate was better for FVC and DLCO in the VATS basal segmentectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy seems to be associated with a more preserved lung function, maintaining more FVC and DLCO levels than lower lobectomy, and could be performed in selected cases ensuring also adequate oncological margins.
