Comparison of Bronchial Sleeve Lobectomy with Pulmonary Arterioplasty versus Pneumonectomy

Long-term survival after sleeve lobectomy versus pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

To compare short-term mortality and long-term overall survival between sleeve lobectomy and pneumonectomy for centrally located non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who had been radically resected for NSCLC by sleeve lobectomy with or without pulmonary arterioplasty at our institution between 2009 and 2023. We then propensity score-matched the patients with pneumonectomy counterparts from a national registry and compared their 30- and 90-day mortality and long-term overall survival before and after matching. The mortality was compared using independence tests and the overall survival using Kaplan-Meier estimates and the log-rank test.

RESULTS

The study included 109 sleeve lobectomy patients and 315 pneumonectomy patients, of whom 60 patients from each group were matched. The 30- and 90-day mortality was similar between both the unmatched and matched groups (unmatched: 3.7 % vs 5.1 % and 5.5 % vs 9.2 %; matched: 5.0 % vs 6.7 % and 5.0 % vs 12 %. All p-values >0.05). The overall survival was longer in both the unmatched and matched sleeve lobectomy patients (unmatched: hazard ratio [HR] 0.52, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.73, p < 0.001; matched HR 0.55, 95 % CI 0.34-0.90, p = 0.018). The 5-year overall survival was 68 % and 49 % for the unmatched sleeve lobectomy and pneumonectomy patients, respectively, and 61 % and 42 % for the matched ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Sleeve lobectomy yields non-inferior short-term mortality and superior long-term overall survival compared with pneumonectomy and should be the resection of choice for centrally located NSCLC when feasible.

Impact of neoadjuvant therapy on angioplastic lobectomy: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) prior to angioplastic lobectomy (AL) in non-small cell lung cancer is unclear. This study assessed its impact on morbidity, mortality and 5-year survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 114 patients who underwent AL at 2 tertiary centres from January 2000 to December 2020. Comparisons were made between patients who received NT and those who did not.

RESULTS

Among the patients, 78 (68.4%) underwent upfront surgery, and 36 (31.6%) received NT. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications (46.2% vs 31.6%, P = 0.42) or mortality rates (0% vs 3.8%, P = 0.55). Pathological upstaging differed significantly (37.2% vs 5.6%, P = 0.0008). Five-year survival rates were comparable (54% vs 38%, P = 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy does not adversely affect morbidity, arterial repair complications or mortality in AL. There are no survival differences at 5 years. AL remains a safe option following NT.

Sleeve lobectomy versus pneumonectomy following neoadjuvant therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant therapy has gained widespread acceptance as the standard modality for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. However, the clinical benefit of sleeve lobectomy (SL) or pneumonectomy (PN) following neoadjuvant therapy remains controversial.

METHODS

The clinical and pathological characteristics of non-small cell lung cancer patients who underwent SL or PN after neoadjuvant therapy at a high-volume single centre between December 2019 and March 2023 were retrospectively collected. The SL group was matched 4:1 with the PN group by propensity score matching. The surgical outcomes were systematically collected and analysed.

RESULTS

During a 5-year study period, the majority of patients (175 of 215, 81.4%) underwent the SL procedure, while 40 patients (18.6%) underwent PN. Following propensity score matching, the SL group exhibited lower postoperative arrythmia (4.8% vs 26.9%, P < 0.001), lower 30-day mortality (1.0% vs 7.7%, P = 0.046) and a shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (6.0 days vs 10.0 days, P < 0.001), compared with the PN group. In addition, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of disease-free survival or overall survival (P = 0.977 and P = 0.913, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

SL stands as a safe and feasible option for patients with centrally located non-small-cell lung cancer who have undergone neoadjuvant therapy, in comparison to PN. This finding suggests that SL remains the preferable choice when feasible in the context of the widespread utilization of neoadjuvant therapy.

Resectable non-stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer: the surgical perspective

Surgery remains an essential element of the multimodality radical treatment of patients with early-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer. In addition, thoracic surgery is one of the key specialties involved in the lung cancer tumour board. The importance of the surgeon in the setting of a multidisciplinary panel is ever-increasing in light of the crucial concept of resectability, which is at the base of patient selection for neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatments within trials and in real-world practice. This review covers some of the topics which are relevant in the daily practice of a thoracic oncological surgeon and should also be known by the nonsurgical members of the tumour board. It covers the following topics: the pre-operative selection of the surgical candidate in terms of fitness in light of the ever-improving nonsurgical treatment alternatives unfit patients may benefit from; the definition of resectability, which is so important to include patients into trials and to select the most appropriate radical treatment; the impact of surgical access and surgical extension with the evolving role of minimally invasive surgery, sublobar resections and parenchymal-sparing sleeve resections to avoid pneumonectomy.

Complex Sleeve Lobectomy Has Lower Postoperative Major Complications Than Pneumonectomy in Patients with Centrally Located Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

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.

Arterial Sleeve Lobectomy: Does Pulmonary Artery Reconstruction Type Impact Lung Function?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this single-center retrospective cohort study was to assess the impact of arterial reconstruction technique on lung perfusion. The second objective was to ascertain the functional validity of arterial sleeve lobectomy.

METHOD

Between January 2001 and December 2020, a total of 81 patients underwent lobectomy with pulmonary artery (PA) reconstruction for lung cancer at the University Hospital of Montpellier. After excluding patients with an incomplete postoperative pulmonary function test, we conducted a comparative analysis of the preoperative and postoperative functional outcomes (FEV1) of 48 patients, as well as the preoperative and postoperative Technetium99m scintigraphic pulmonary perfusion results of 28 patients. Then, we analyzed postoperative perfusion results according to the pulmonary artery reconstruction techniques use.

RESULTS

PA reconstruction types were as follows: 9 direct angioplasties (19%), 14 patch angioplasties (29%), 7 end-to-end anastomoses (15%), 6 prosthetic bypasses (12%), 11 arterial allograft bypasses (23%), and 1 custom-made xenopericardial conduit bypass. Regardless of the type of vascular reconstruction performed, the comparative analysis of lung perfusion revealed no significant difference between the preoperative and postoperative perfusion ratio of the remaining parenchyma (median = 29.5% versus 32.5%, respectively; p = 0.47). Regarding the pulmonary functional test, postoperative predicted FEV1 significantly underestimated the actual postoperative measured FEV1 by about 260 mL (11.4%) of the preoperative value. The patency rate was 96% and the 5-year overall survival was 49% for a mean follow up period of 34 months.

CONCLUSION

Lobectomy with PA reconstruction is a valid parenchymal-sparing technique in terms of perfusion and respiratory function.

Prognostic Significance of the Proposed Residual Tumor Classification in Patients With NSCLC After Sleeve Lobectomy

Introduction

To validate the residual tumor (R) classification proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) in NSCLC after sleeve lobectomy.

Methods

A total of 682 patients were analyzed. The R status, on the basis of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) criteria, was recategorized according to the IASLC descriptors. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among different R classifications were assessed for the entire cohort and pathologic node (pN) subgroups.

Results

All in all, 631 (92.5%), 48 (7.1%), and three patients (0.4%) were classified as R0, R1, and R2, respectively, by the UICC criteria, whereas 489 (71.7%), 110 (16.1%), and 83 patients (12.2%), received R0, uncertain resection (R[un]), and R1/2 resection, respectively, according to the IASLC criteria. There were 96 patients (15.2%) with UICC R0 who were reclassified as R(un), mainly because of the positive highest mediastinal node station (82 of 96, 85.4%). A total of 46 patients (7.3%) were reassigned from UICC R0 to IASLC R1/2 owing to extracapsular extension. For the entire cohort, patients with R(un) and R1/2 exhibited worse RFS (R[un], adjusted p = 0.023; R1/2, adjusted p = 0.001) and OS (R[un], adjusted p = 0.040; R1/2, adjusted p = 0.051) compared with R0. No significant differences were observed between R(un) and R1/2 (RFS, adjusted p = 0.586; OS, adjusted p = 0.781). Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed a distinct prognostic impact of the IASLC R status-with prognostic significances in the pN1 and pN2 subgroups, but not in the pN0 subgroup.

Conclusions

The IASLC R descriptors helped to stratify the prognosis of NSCLC after sleeve lobectomy, with its prognostic impact varied among pN stages.

Neoadjuvant therapy does not increase postoperative morbidity of sleeve lobectomy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of sleeve lobectomy after neoadjuvant therapy by assessing the postoperative morbidity.

METHODS

Patients who underwent sleeve lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were retrospectively analyzed from January 2018 to December 2021. A total of 613 patients were enrolled, including 124 patients who received previous neoadjuvant therapy and 489 patients who did not. Propensity score matching was adopted to create a balanced cohort consisting of 97 paired cases. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were compared between the 2 groups, and logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, univariable logistic regression analysis showed that smoking history (odds ratio [OR], 1.501; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.011-2.229, P = .044), open thoracotomy (OR, 1.748; 95% CI, 1.178-2.593, P = .006), and operation time more than 150 minutes (OR, 1.548; 95% CI, 1.029-2.328, P = .036) were risk factors for postoperative complications, and multivariable logistic regression analysis showed open thoracotomy was an independent risk factor (OR, 1.765; 95% CI, 1.178-2.643, P = .006). In the balanced cohort, the neoadjuvant group had a lower proportion of double-sleeve resections (3.1% vs 11.3%, P = .035) and longer postoperative chest tube drainage (6.67 ± 3.81 vs 5.13 ± 3.74 days, P < .001). However, no significant differences were observed in postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups (25.8% vs 24.7%, P = .869). The complete pathologic response of chemoimmunotherapy was significantly superior to chemotherapy alone (28.2% vs 4.1%, P < .001), and no significant differences were noted in postoperative morbidity in different neoadjuvant therapy modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

After neoadjuvant therapy, sleeve lobectomy can be safely performed with no increased postoperative morbidity.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy: a single-center retrospective study

Background

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy has been increasingly applied to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the comparison between robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the feasibility and oncological efficacy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy is scarce. This study aims to assess the superiorities of RATS over (VATS) concerning short-term outcomes in treating NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.

Methods

NSCLC patients receiving RATS or VATS lobectomy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy at Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2019 to 2022 were retrospectively identified. Baseline clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival profiles were analyzed.

Results

Forty-six NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy were included and divided into the RATS (n=15) and VATS (n=31) groups. The baseline clinical characteristics and induction-related adverse events were comparable between the two groups (all p>0.050). The 30-day mortality in the RATS and VATS groups were 0% and 3.23%, respectively (p=1.000). Patients undergoing RATS were associated with reduced surgical-related intensive unit care (ICU) stay than those receiving VATS (0.0 [0.0-0.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-1.0] days, p=0.026). Moreover, RATS assessed more N1 LNs (6.27 ± 1.94 vs 4.90 ± 1.92, p=0.042) and LN stations (3.07 ± 1.03 vs 2.52 ± 0.57, p=0.038) compared with VATS. By comparison, no difference was found in surgical outcomes, pathological results, and postoperative complications between the RATS and VATS groups (all p>0.050). Finally, RATS and VATS achieved comparable one-year recurrence-free survival (82.96% vs. 85.23%, p=0.821) and the timing of central nervous system, LN, and bone recurrences (all p>0.050).

Conclusion

RATS is safe and feasible for NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy, reducing surgical-related ICU stay, assessing increased N1 LNs and stations, and achieving similar survival profiles to VATS.

Double sleeve resections

Double sleeve lung resections are complex surgical procedures that require specialized surgical expertise and careful patient selection. These procedures allow for the preservation of lung tissue while still achieving complete tumor resection for central tumors. Although initially considered high-risk operations, double sleeve lung resections have become a viable option for central tumors. Recent studies have shown that double sleeve lung resections are associated with lower morbidity and mortality rates than pneumonectomy. Furthermore, double sleeve lung resections may be associated with similar or even better long-term oncological outcomes compared to pneumonectomy, with the added benefit of preserving lung parenchyma and reducing the incidence of postoperative complications.

The Surgical Management of Lung Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

This review summarizes key recent developments relevant to the surgical management of lung neuroendocrine neoplasms (L-NENs), including typical and atypical carcinoids, large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and small cell lung carcinoma. This review includes recent insights into the classification, clinical presentation, diagnostic workup, treatment options, and follow-up. Highlighted topics include general principles of surgery in localized or locally advanced or metastatic L-NENs, lung-sparing surgery for small, peripheral typical carcinoids, adjuvant and systemic therapies for typical and atypical carcinoids, and surgery and adjuvant therapies for large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma and small cell lung carcinoma.

Parenchymal Sparing Surgery for Lung Cancer: Focus on Pulmonary Artery Reconstruction

Reconstruction of the pulmonary artery (PA) associated with lobectomy for the radical resection of lung cancer has been progressively gaining diffusion in lung cancer surgery as a safe and effective therapeutic option that may allow radical resection when lobectomy is not technically feasible, avoiding pneumonectomy. There are some controversial aspects concerning the intraoperative and perioperative management of a sleeve resection with PA reconstruction that may influence the outcome. In the present article, the authors have analyzed some of the main technical and oncological aspects to take stock of what they have learned from their lung-sparing operations experience over time. PA reconstruction may require prosthetic materials including different options with variable cost. A main concern in vascular reconstructive procedures is avoiding tension on the anastomosis. When PA reconstruction is required, appropriate anticoagulation management is crucial. Results from the main literature data confirm the reliability of lobectomy associated with PA reconstruction in terms of perioperative morbidity and long-term survival. Sleeve lobectomy and PA reconstruction can be performed safely and effectively even after induction therapy.

Feasibility of double sleeve lobectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

This study intends to appraise the feasibility of double sleeve lobectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in central non-small-cell lung cancer with bronchovascular aggression.

METHODS

This retrospective study included non-small-cell lung cancer patients who received double sleeve lobectomy from January 2014 to June 2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and the non-neoadjuvant chemotherapy group. Demographic data and perioperative outcomes were compared between these 2 groups.

RESULTS

Of the 110 patients who received double sleeve lobectomy during this period, 35 patients (31.8%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Compared with the non-neoadjuvant chemotherapy group, patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were associated with younger age (P = 0.026), smaller pathologic tumour size (P = 0.005), higher forced expiratory volume in 1 s (P = 0.007), higher forced expiratory volume in 1 s of predicted value (P = 0.005) and higher clinical stage (P < 0.001). In the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group, 18 patients (51.4%) attained a partial response and 17 patients (48.6%) achieved stable disease. The postoperative hospital stays (P = 0.042) and chest tube drainage duration (P = 0.030) were longer in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and other perioperative performances were similar between these 2 groups. No statistically significant difference was reported in postoperative complications and mortality between these 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The intraoperative performance and postoperative outcomes of double sleeve lobectomy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy were similar to direct surgery, indicating that double sleeve lobectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is feasible and safe in central lung cancer involving both the pulmonary artery and bronchus.