Dataset Information

Non-intercostal access for video-assisted thoracic surgery-analysis of technical advantages and disadvantages.

ABSTRACT: Background:Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy has become an accepted method for the treatment of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The standard VATS approach is an intercostal one which is often followed by postoperative pain due to injury of the intercostal nerve. The non-intercostal techniques of VATS include the subxiphoid, transcervical, transdiaphragmatic and transoral procedures. Methods:The technical difficulty of operative management of the anatomical structures during VATS anatomical resection are compared for the intercostal, subxiphoid and transcervical approaches. Results:Some operative steps have different range of difficulty, which are analyzed in detail. Conclusions:The clearest advantages of the non-intercostal approaches include less postoperative pain and superradial bilateral mediastinal lymphadenectomy in case of the transcervical approach. However, the non-intercostal approaches are more technically demanding procedures, which therapeutic role has to be clarified in the future.

SUBMITTER: Zielinski M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6258655 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Non-intercostal access for video-assisted thoracic surgery-analysis of technical advantages and disadvantages.

Zieliński Marcin M Gwozdz Pawel P Wilkojc Michal M Kosinski Sylweriusz S Fryzlewicz Edward E Nabialek Tomasz T Pankowski Juliusz J Kwiatkowski Robert R

Journal of thoracic disease 20181101 Suppl 32

<h4>Background</h4>Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy has become an accepted method for the treatment of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The standard VATS approach is an intercostal one which is often followed by postoperative pain due to injury of the intercostal nerve. The non-intercostal techniques of VATS include the subxiphoid, transcervical, transdiaphragmatic and transoral procedures.<h4>Methods</h4>The technical difficulty of operative management of the ...[more]

PMID: 30505560

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVideo-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) generally involves endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. However, inevitably, this may cause intubation-related complications and prolong the postoperative recovery process. Gradually, non-intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (NIVATS) is increasingly being utilized. However, its safety and efficacy remain controversial.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to August 2020 were selected from the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and included in this study according to the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers screened these RCTs and independently extracted the relevant data. After assessing the risk of bias in these RCTs, a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Pooled data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model.ResultsMeta-analysis data demonstrated that the mean difference (MD) in the length of hospital stay between non-intubated patients and intubated patients was -1.41 days, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of -2.47 to -0.34 (P=0.01). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score between the two groups showed a MD of -0.34 (95% CI: -0.58 to -0.10; P=0.006). Patients who underwent NIVATS presented with lower rates of overall complications [odds ratio (OR) 0.41; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.67; P=0.0004], air leak (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.87; P=0.02), pharyngeal discomfort (OR 0.08; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.17; P<0.00001), hoarseness (OR 0.06; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.21; P<0.00001), and gastrointestinal reactions (OR 0.23; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.53; P=0.0005) compared to intubated patients. The anesthesia satisfaction scores in the NIVATS group were significantly higher than those of the VATS group (MD 0.50; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.88; P=0.009). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the length of operation time (MD 0.90 hours; 95% CI: -0.23 to 2.03; P=0.12) and surgical field satisfaction (1 point) (OR 0.73; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.59; P=0.43) between the two groups.ConclusionsNIVATS is a safe and feasible form of intervention that can reduce the postoperative pain and complications of various systems and shorten hospital stay duration without prolonging the operation time.

Project description:BackgroundIt remains no clear conclusion about which is better between robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term and long-term efficacy between RATS and VATS for NSCLC.MethodsPubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Medline, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before December 2020. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Fixed or random effect models were applied according to heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted.ResultsA total of 18 studies including 11,247 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 5114 patients were in the RATS group and 6133 in the VATS group. Compared with VATS, RATS was associated with less blood loss (WMD = - 50.40, 95% CI -90.32 ~ - 10.48, P = 0.010), lower conversion rate (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.43 ~ 0.60, P < 0.001), more harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 1.72, 95% CI 0.63 ~ 2.81, P = 0.002) and stations (WMD = 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 ~ 0.86, P = 0.005), shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (WMD = - 0.61, 95% CI -0.78 ~ - 0.44, P < 0.001) and hospital stay (WMD = - 1.12, 95% CI -1.58 ~ - 0.66, P < 0.001), lower overall complication rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 ~ 0.99, P = 0.020), lower recurrence rate (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 ~ 0.72, P < 0.001), and higher cost (WMD = 3909.87 USD, 95% CI 3706.90 ~ 4112.84, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between RATS and VATS in operative time, mortality, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Sensitivity analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two techniques in conversion rate, number of harvested lymph nodes and stations, and overall complication.ConclusionsThe results revealed that RATS is a feasible and safe technique compared with VATS in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of robotic surgery for NSCLC.

Dataset Information

Non-intercostal access for video-assisted thoracic surgery-analysis of technical advantages and disadvantages.

Publications

Non-intercostal access for video-assisted thoracic surgery-analysis of technical advantages and disadvantages.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets