Determining optimal air leak resolution criteria when using digital pleural drainage device after lung resection.

Objective: There is limited clinical evidence to support any specific parenchymal air leak resolution criteria when using digital pleural drainage devices following lung resection. The aim of this study is to determine an optimal air leak resolution criteria, where duration of chest tube drainage is minimized while avoiding complications from premature chest tube removal. Methods: Airflow data averaged at 10-minute intervals was collected prospectively using a digital pleural drainage device (Thopaz; Medela) in 400 patients from 2015 to 2019. All permutations of air leak resolution criteria from <10 to 100 mL/minute for 4 to 12 hours were applied retrospectively to the pleural drainage data to determine air leak duration, and air leak recurrence frequency and volume. Air leak recurrence indicates potential for rather than occurrence of adverse events. Descriptive statistics were used to identify the optimal criteria based on patient safety (low frequency and volume of air leak recurrences), and efficiency (shortest initial air leak duration). Results: The majority of the 400 patients underwent lobectomy (57% [227 out of 400]), wedge resections (29% [115 out of 400]), or segmentectomies (8% [32 out of 400]) for lung cancer (90% [360 out of 400]). An airflow threshold <50 mL/minute resulted in longer air leak duration before meeting the criteria for air leak resolution (P < .0001). Air leak recurrence frequency and volume were greater in patients with a monitoring period <8 consecutive hours (P < .0001). Conclusions: When using a digital pleural drainage device, a postoperative air leak resolution criteria <50 mL/minute for 8 consecutive hours was associated with the best safety and efficiency profile.

A 20-Year Update on the Practice of Thoracic Surgery in Canada: A Survey of the Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgeons.

Background: This study provides an update to a landmark 2004 report describing demographics, training, and trends in adherence to thoracic surgery practice standards in Canada. Methods: An updated questionnaire was administered to all members of the Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgeons via email (n=142, compared to n=68 in 2004). Our report incorporates internal data from Ontario Health and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Results: Forty-eight surgeons completed the survey (male, 70.8%; mean±standard deviation age, 50.3±9.3 years). This represents a 33.8% response rate, compared to 64.7% in 2004. Most surgeons (69%) served a patient population of over 1 million per center; 32%-34% reported an on-call ratio of 1:4-1:5 days, and the average weekly hours worked was 56.4±11.9. Greater access to dedicated geographic units per center (73% in 2021 vs. 53% in 2004) has improved thoracic-associated services and house staff, notably endoscopy units (100% vs. 91%), with 73% of respondents having access to both endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound. Access to thoracic radiology has also improved, particularly regarding positron emission tomography scanners per center (76.9% vs. 13%). Annual case volumes for lung (255 vs. 128), esophageal (41 vs. 19), and mediastinal resections (30 vs. 13), along with hiatal hernia repair (45 vs. 20), have increased substantially despite reports of operating room availability and radiology as rate-limiting steps. Conclusion: This survey characterizes compliance with current practice standards, addressing the needs of thoracic surgeons across Canada. Over 85% of respondents were aware of the 2004 compliance paper, and 35% had applied for resources and equipment in response.

The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique.

Background: Existing reporting guidelines pay insufficient attention to the detail and comprehensiveness reporting of surgical technique. The Surgical techniqUe rePorting chEcklist and standaRds (SUPER) aims to address this gap by defining reporting standards for surgical technique. The SUPER guideline intends to apply to articles that encompass surgical technique in any study design, surgical discipline, and stage of surgical innovation. Methods: Following the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network approach, 16 surgeons, journal editors, and methodologists reviewed existing reporting guidelines relating to surgical technique, reviewed papers from 15 top journals, and brainstormed to draft initial items for the SUPER. The initial items were revised through a three-round Delphi survey from 21 multidisciplinary Delphi panel experts from 13 countries and regions. The final SUPER items were formed after an online consensus meeting to resolve disagreements and a three-round wording refinement by all 16 SUPER working group members and five SUPER consultants. Results: The SUPER reporting guideline includes 22 items that are considered essential for good and informative surgical technique reporting. The items are divided into six sections: background, rationale, and objectives (items 1 to 5); preoperative preparations and requirements (items 6 to 9); surgical technique details (items 10 to 15); postoperative considerations and tasks (items 16 to 19); summary and prospect (items 20 and 21); and other information (item 22). Conclusions: The SUPER reporting guideline has the potential to guide detailed, comprehensive, and transparent surgical technique reporting for surgeons. It may also assist journal editors, peer reviewers, systematic reviewers, and guideline developers in the evaluation of surgical technique papers and help practitioners to better understand and reproduce surgical technique. Trial Registration: https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/#SUPER.

The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique: explanation and elaboration.

Background: Surgical technique plays an essential role in achieving good health outcomes. However, the quality of surgical technique reporting remains heterogeneous. Reporting checklists could help authors to describe the surgical technique more transparently and effectively, as well as to assist reviewers and editors evaluate it more informatively, and promote readers to better understand the technique. We previously developed SUPER (surgical technique reporting checklist and standards) to assist authors in reporting their research that contains surgical technique more transparently. However, further explanation and elaboration of each item are needed for better understanding and reporting practice. Methods: We searched surgical literature in PubMed, Google Scholar and journal websites published up to January 2023 to find multidiscipline examples in various article types for each SUPER item. Results: We explain the 22 items of the SUPER and provide rationales item by item alongside. We provide 69 examples from 53 literature that present optimal reporting of the 22 items. Article types of examples include pure surgical technique, and case reports, observational studies and clinical trials that contain surgical technique. Examples are multidisciplinary, including general surgery, orthopaedical surgery, cardiac surgery, thoracic surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, neurological surgery, oncogenic surgery, and emergency surgery etc. Conclusions: Along with SUPER article, this explanation and elaboration file can promote deeper understanding on the SUPER items. We hope that the article could further guide surgeons and researchers in reporting, and assist editors and peer reviewers in reviewing manuscripts related to surgical technique.

Reporting guidelines for surgical technique could be improved: a scoping review and a call for action.

OBJECTIVES: To identify reporting guidelines related to surgical technique and propose recommendations for areas that require improvement. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A protocol-guided scoping review was conducted. A literature search of MEDLINE, the EQUATOR Network Library, Google Scholar, and Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations was conducted to identify surgical technique reporting guidelines published up to December 31, 2021. RESULTS: We finally included 55 surgical technique reporting guidelines, vascular surgery (n = 18, 32.7%) was the most common among the clinical specialties covered. The included guidelines generally showed a low degree of international and multidisciplinary cooperation. Few guidelines provided a detailed development process (n = 14, 25.5%), conducted a systematic literature review (n = 13, 23.6%), used the Delphi method (n = 4, 7.3%), or described post-publication strategy (n = 6, 10.9%). The vast majority guidelines focused on the reporting of intraoperative period (n = 50, 90.9%). However, of the guidelines requiring detailed descriptions of surgical technique methodology (n = 43, 78.2%), most failed to provide guidance on what constitutes an adequate description. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates significant deficiencies in the development methodology and practicality of reporting guidelines for surgical technique. A standardized reporting guideline that is developed rigorously and focuses on details of surgical technique may serve as a necessary impetus for change.

Evolution of Process and Outcome Measures during an Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery Program.

BACKGROUND: A time course analysis was undertaken to evaluate how perioperative process-of-care and outcome measures evolved after implementation of an enhanced recovery after thoracic surgery (ERATS) program. METHODS: Outcome and process-of-care measures were compared between patients undergoing major elective thoracic surgery during a 9-month pre-ERATS implementation period to those at 1-3, 4-6, and 7-9 months post-ERATS implementation. Outcome measures included length of stay, the 30-day readmission rate, 30-day emergency department visits, and minor and major adverse events. Process measures included first time to activity, out-of-bed, ambulation, fluid diet, diet as tolerated, as well as removal of the first and last chest tube, epidural, patient-controlled analgesia, and Foley and intravenous catheters. RESULTS: In total, 704 patients (352 pre-ERATS, 352 post-ERATS) were included. Mobilization-related process measures, including time to first activity (16.5 vs. 6.8 hours, p<0.001), out-of-bed (17.6 vs. 8.9 hours, p<0.001), and ambulation (32.4 vs. 25.4 hours, p=0.04) saw statistically significant improvements by 1-3 months post-ERATS implementation compared to pre-ERATS. Time to Foley removal improved by 4-6 months post-ERATS (19.5 vs. 18.2 hours, p=0.003). Outcome measures, including the 30-day readmission rate and emergency department visits, steadily decreased post-ERATS. By 7-9 months post-ERATS, both minor (18.2% vs. 7.9%, p=0.009) and major (13.6% vs. 4.4%, p=0.007) adverse events demonstrated statistically significant improvements. Length of stay trended towards improvement from 6.2 days pre-ERATS to 4.8 days by 7-9 months post-ERATS (p=0.06). CONCLUSION: The adoption of ERATS led to improvements in multiple process-of-care measures, which may collectively and gradually achieve optimization of clinical outcomes.

Developing the surgical technique reporting checklist and standards: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Standardized and transparent reporting of surgical technique is the cornerstone of effective dissemination, implementation and improvement. However, current reporting of surgical techniques is inadequate. The existing guidelines potentially applied to guide surgical technique reporting are with a minimal highlight of the surgical technique, lack requirements explaining what extent and dimensions need to be described in detail, or are unlikely to extrapolate to a wide range of surgical techniques. This study aims to formulate a rigorous protocol to develop a surgical technique reporting checklist and standards (SUPER) that defines what a clear, comprehensive and detailed surgical technique report should be contained. METHODS: This protocol is designed following the classic guidance for developing reporting guidelines recommended by the EQUATOR network. RESULTS: The development team will consist of surgeons (~80%), methodologists, and journal editors. The draft checklist sources will include a scoping review of existing reporting guidelines related to surgical technique, surgical technique articles from 15 top journals published in the last year, and brainstorming by the multidisciplinary development team. The final SUPER checklist will be formed after three rounds of Delphi surveys, one round of face-to-face meeting, and a month-long pilot test. The SUPER checklist will be published as open-access and be used in combination with existing reporting guidelines related to surgical techniques (e.g., IDEAL). This protocol will steer the SUPER checklist's development, allowing us to further elaborate surgical technique reporting for all surgical specialties, and enabling a more favorable experience for surgeons, nurses, medical students, residents, editors, and reviewers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at the EQUATOR network on December 18th, 2020. Available at: https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-other-study-designs/.

Evidence on reporting guidelines for surgical technique in clinical disciplines: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The reporting of surgical techniques is of mixed quality, with most at a very minimal level. Reporting guidelines that could be applied to guide surgical technique reporting vary in methodology for development, discipline coverage, dimension coverage and detail requested. However, a scoping review that could indicate the gaps and efforts needed in surgical technique reporting guidelines is lacking and warranted. This study aims to design a methodological rigour protocol to guide the development of a scoping review of surgical technique reporting guidelines. METHODS: This protocol is designed following the 2020 manual proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. To further ensure the soundness of the protocol, we also included multidisciplinary professionals (including methodologists, clinicians, and journal editors) to refine the protocol. DISCUSSION: Seven key steps for developing the scoping review are identified and presented in detail, including (I) identifying the research questions; (II) inclusion criteria; (III) search strategy; (IV) source of evidence selection; (V) data extraction; (VI) analysis of the evidence; and (VII) presentation of the results. Guided by this protocol, the subsequent scoping review will inform us the overview of surgical technique reporting guidelines and precisely guide our direction and next steps in improving surgical technique reporting guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This protocol is not registered as the PROSPERO database only accepts registration of systematic review protocols while does not accept registration of scoping review protocols.

Prophylaxis for patients at Risk to Eliminate Post-operative Atrial Fibrillation (PREP-AF trial): a protocol for a feasibility randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a frequent adverse event after thoracic surgery with associated morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. It has been shown to be preventable with prophylactic amiodarone, which is only recommended in high-risk individuals due to the potential associated side effects. Risk factors for POAF have been identified and incorporated into a prediction model to identify high-risk patients. Further evaluation in the form of a multicenter clinical trial is required to assess the effectiveness of prophylaxis specifically in this high-risk population. The feasibility of such a trial first needs to be assessed. METHODS: The PREP-AF trial is a double-blind randomized controlled feasibility trial. Individuals undergoing major thoracic surgery who are identified to be high-risk by the POAF prediction model will be randomized 1:1 to receive a short course of amiodarone vs. placebo in the immediate postoperative period. The primary outcome is feasibility, which will be measured by the number of eligible patients identified, consented, and randomized; intervention adherence; and measurement of future outcomes of a full trial. DISCUSSION: This study will determine the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of prophylactic amiodarone, in high-risk patients undergoing major thoracic surgery. This will inform the development of a multi-center trial to establish if prophylactic amiodarone is safe and effective at reducing the incidence of POAF. Preventing this adverse event will not only improve outcomes for patients but also reduce the associated health resource utilization and costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04392921 . Registered on 19 May 2020.

Derivation and validation of a nomogram model for pulmonary thromboembolism in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: A specific risk-stratification tool is needed to facilitate safe and cost-effective approaches to the prophylaxis of acute pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) in lung cancer surgery patients. This study aimed to develop and validate a simple nomogram model for the prediction of PTE after lung cancer surgery using readily obtainable clinical characteristics. METHODS: A total of 14,427 consecutive adult patients who underwent lung cancer surgery between January 2015 and July 2018 in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Included in the cohort were 136 patients who developed PTE and 544 non-PTE patients. The patients were randomly divided into the derivation group (70%, 95 PTE patients and 380 non-PTE patients) and the validation group (30%, 41 PTE patients and 164 non-PTE patients). A nomogram model was developed based on the results of multivariate logistic analysis in the derivation group. The cut-off values were defined using Youden's index. The prognostic accuracy was measured by area under the curve (AUC) values. RESULTS: In the derivation group, multivariate logistic analysis was carried out to evaluate the risk score. The risk assessment model contained five variables: age [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.008-1.083, P=0.016], body mass index (95% CI: 1.077-1.319, P=0.001), operation time (95% CI: 1.002-1.014, P=0.008), the serum level of cancer antigen 15-3 (CA15-3) before surgery (95% CI: 1.019-1.111, P=0.005), and the abnormal results of compression venous ultrasonography before surgery (95% CI: 2.819-18.838, P<0.001). All of them were independent risk factors of PTE. To simplify the risk assessment model, a nomogram model was established, which showed a good predictive performance in the derivation group (AUC 0.792, 95% CI: 0.734-0.853) and in the validation group (AUC 0.813, 95% CI: 0.737-0.890). CONCLUSIONS: A high-performance nomogram was established on the risk factors for PTE in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery. The nomogram could be used to provide an individual risk assessment and guide prophylaxis decisions for patients. Further external validation of the model is needed in lung cancer surgery patients in other clinical centers.

Adjuvant melatonin for the prevention of recurrence and mortality following lung cancer resection (AMPLCaRe): A randomized placebo controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite curative intent resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), recurrence leading to mortality remains too common. Melatonin has shown promise for the treatment of patients with lung cancer; however, its effect following cancer resection has not been studied. We evaluated if melatonin taken after complete resection reduces lung cancer recurrence and mortality, or impacts quality of life (QOL), symptomatology or immune function. METHODS: Participants received melatonin (20 mg) or placebo nightly for one year following surgical resection of primary NSCLC. The primary outcome was two-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes included five-year DFS, adverse events, QOL, fatigue, sleep, depression, anxiety, pain, and biomarkers assessing for immune function/inflammation. This study is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov NCT00668707. FINDINGS: 709 patients across eight centres were randomized to melatonin (n = 356) versus placebo (n = 353). At two years, melatonin showed a relative risk of 1·01 (95% CI 0·83-1·22), p = 0·94 for DFS. At five years, melatonin showed a hazard ratio of 0·97 (95% CI 0·86-1·09), p = 0·84 for DFS. When stratified by cancer stage (I/II and III/IV), a hazard reduction of 25% (HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·61-0·92, p = 0·005) in five-year DFS was seen for participants in the treatment arm with advanced cancer (stage III/IV). No meaningful differences were seen in any other outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant melatonin following resection of NSCLC does not affect DFS for patients with resected early stage NSCLC, yet may increase DFS in patients with late stage disease. Further study is needed to confirm this positive result. No beneficial effects were seen in QOL, symptoms, or immune function. FUNDING: This study was funded by the Lotte and John Hecht Memorial Foundation and the Gateway for Cancer Research Foundation.

Variation in management of post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after thoracic surgery.

OBJECTIVES: New-onset post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a frequent adverse event following major thoracic surgery and is associated with increased risk of perioperative morbidity, length of stay and stroke. It is managed initially with rate and rhythm control therapy; however, optimal duration and the need for anticoagulation are poorly understood. This study aims to assess practice variation regarding POAF management and duration. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort study included patients who underwent major thoracic surgery and developed POAF between 2008 and 2017, managed with rate and rhythm control therapy alone. Demographic, clinical, and surgical variables/outcomes, POAF management, and incidence of POAF recurrence in the 30-day post-operative period were collected. Chi-square and T-tests determined significance. RESULTS: Of 2054 patients undergoing thoracic surgery, 155 (75%) patients developed POAF. Different rate and rhythm control agents were used, most commonly metoprolol. 107 (69%) continued rate and rhythm control therapy upon hospital discharge for a mean of 56 days. Among the 48 patients with discontinuation of rate and rhythm control therapy on discharge, none demonstrated recurrence of POAF; in contrast to 3 of 107 patients who continued on therapy. Among patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2, 15% were prescribed anticoagulation on discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Use of rate and rhythm control therapy and anticoagulation for POAF is significantly varied in practice. Many patients are not continued on rate and rhythm control after hospital discharge, which does not appear to impact risk of POAF recurrence. Further research to inform guidelines for POAF management, including therapy duration and indications for anticoagulation is warranted.

A standard for hilar and intrapulmonary lymph node dissection and pathological examination in early non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation in the staging of lymph nodes (LNs) as part of tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A new dissection and pathological examination standard for hilar and intrapulmonary LNs needs to be established for patients with early-stage T1-3N0M0 NSCLC. METHODS: This study involved 3,002 patients with T1-3N0M0 NSCLC who underwent radical lobectomy or total pneumonectomy in the thoracic departments of 11 Chinese institutions between January 1999 and October 2013. The Cox model was applied for univariate and multivariate analyses in the examination of station 10, 11 LN and station 12, 13, 14 LN. A hilar and intrapulmonary standard (HI standard) was then established based on univariate and multiple-factor analyses conducted using the Cox model. RESULTS: Among the 3,002 patients enrolled in the study, 2,609 underwent at least one examination of station 10, 11 LN (A1), while 393 did not undergo examination of station 10, 11 LN (A0). The A0 and A1 groups had 5-year survival rates of 76% and 80%, respectively (P=0.018). Further, 1,764 patients underwent at least one examination of station 12, 13, 14 LN (B1), while 1,238 patients did not (B0). The B0 and B1 groups had 5-year survival rates of 77% and 82%, respectively (P=0.008). In total, 1,269 patients attained the HI standard (C1), and 1,733 did not (C0). The C0 and C1 groups had 5-year survival rates of 77% and 83%, respectively (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The HI standard can improve both the prognosis and survival rates of patients with T1-3N0M0 NSCLC. This will provide important guidance for pulmonary LN dissection and pathological examination in NSCLC cases.

Long-term Symptom Control After Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy and Dor Fundoplication for Achalasia.

BACKGROUND: Achalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder in which there is incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter and absence of peristalsis in the lower two thirds of the esophagus. A favored treatment is laparoscopic modified Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication (LHMDor) with more than 90% immediate beneficial effect. The short-term outcomes of LHMDor are well documented, but stability and durability of postoperative symptom control over time is less understood. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2016, 54 patients with achalasia underwent LHMDor (single center). Using validated questionnaires, patients rated their symptoms in five domains: pain, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), dysphagia, regurgitation, and quality of life. Symptom ratings were done preoperatively, 4 weeks postoperatively, 6 months postoperatively, and yearly after the operation. RESULTS: As expected, patients reported marked improvement in dysphagia, odynophagia, regurgitation, GERD, and quality of life after the operation (P < .001). From then on, the symptom control remained durable with respect to absence of pain, regurgitation, and odynophagia; however, we observed a recurrence of GERD symptoms beginning 3 to 5 years postoperatively (P = .001 and P = .04, respectively), with associated increased antireflux medication use. After initial LHMDor, 5 patients required endoscopic dilatation an average of 1.5 years postoperatively, and no patient required reoperation. Patients reported preserved improved quality of life to 11 years after the operation (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the durability of LHMDor in the definitive management of achalasia, offering consistent symptomatic relief and significant improvement in quality of life over the decade after surgery, despite some increase in GERD symptoms and antireflux medication use.

Laparoscopic excision of pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriosis.

OBJECTIVE: To present a five-step approach to the laparoscopic excision of pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriosis. DESIGN: Surgical video. SETTING: Academic tertiary care hospital. PATIENT(S): 35-year-old nulliparous woman observed for chronic pelvic pain and infertility with a diagnosis of diaphragmatic endometriosis at a prior laparoscopy. Symptoms included severe chest pain and right shoulder tip pain, refractory to multiple medical therapies. INTERVENTION(S): Laparoscopic excision of pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Description of the relevant anatomy, the literature surrounding pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriosis, and the approach to the surgical intervention and postoperative care. RESULT(S): The laparoscopic excision of the full-thickness pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriotic lesions was successfully completed according to five reproducible steps: upper abdominal survey, liver mobilization, excision of diaphragmatic endometriosis, intrathoracic laparoscopic exploration, and closure of the diaphragmatic defect. CONCLUSION(S): Although rare and challenging to diagnose and treat, pericardial and diaphragmatic endometriosis and its potentially debilitating symptoms can be successfully managed through a multidisciplinary and stepwise surgical intervention.

Correction to: Postoperative Adverse Events are Associated with Oncologic Recurrence Following Curative­intent Resection for Lung Cancer.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in author names. The given and family names of all the authors was transposed. The author names are corrected with this correction. The original article has been corrected.

Postoperative Adverse Events are Associated with Oncologic Recurrence Following Curative-intent Resection for Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of patients suffer short-term postoperative adverse events (AEs) and metastatic recurrence in the long-term following curative-intent lung cancer resection. The association between AEs, particularly infectious in nature, and disease recurrence is controversial. We sought to evaluate the association of postoperative AEs on risk of developing recurrence and recurrence-free survival (RFS) following curative-intent lung resection surgery. METHODS: All lung cancer resections at a single institution (January 2008-July 2015) were included, with prospective collection of AEs using the Thoracic Morbidity & Mortality System. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of AEs on recurrence, with results presented as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). An a priori, clinically driven approach to predictor variable selection was used. Kaplan-Meier curves were used examine the relationship between AE and RFS. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: 892 patients underwent curative-intent resection. 342 (38.3%) patients experienced an AE; 69 (7.7%) patients developed infectious AEs. 17.6% (n = 157) of patients had disease recurrence after mean follow-up of 26.5 months. Severe (Grade IV) AEs were associated with increased risk of recurrence (3.40; 95% CI 1.56-7.41) and a trend to decreased RFS. Major infectious AEs were associated with increased risk of recurrence (HR 1.71; CI 1.05-2.8) and earlier time to recurrence (no infectious AE 66 months, minor infectious 41 months, major infectious 54 months; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing curative-intent lung cancer resection, postoperative AEs associated with critical illness or major infection were associated with increased risk of oncologic recurrence.