Transcervical uniportal pulmonary lobectomy

Current perspective on uniportal and multiportal video-assisted thoracic surgery during lobectomy for lung cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most typical type of lung cancer, and it is the leading cancer-related mortality globally. Lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC has been characterized in the previous decade using a wide range of methodologies. The development of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) allowed surgeons first to reduce the thoracotomy size, which is generally anterior, limiting it to trocar incisions or a single portal approach. This review aimed to describe current perspectives on operative outcomes, lymph node removal, oncologic outcomes, and advantages for surgeons performing uniportal VATS (uVATS) and multiportal (mVATS) lobectomy. The advantages of uVATS include comfortable operating for surgeons with a direct view and safety, and for patients more favourable operative outcomes. Also, the uVATS approach has previously been demonstrated to be effective and safe, with positive outcomes not just with respect to cosmetics but also in terms of a speedy recovery. Oncological uVATS clearance is comparable to multiportal VATS with respect to early mid-term survivability as well as nodal staging, as per retrospective comparison studies. However, the interpretation of outcomes must be made cautiously due to selection bias as well as lack of long-term follow-up; the choice of which VATS approach to utilize for patients' treatment following pulmonary resection is largely based on the preferences of the surgeon. As a result, it is difficult to say if one VATS method is better than another.

Uniportal and three-portal video-assisted thoracic surgery pulmonary lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer (UNIT trial): study protocol of a single-center randomized trial

Background

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy is currently the recommended approach for treating early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Different VATS approaches have been proposed so far, and the actual advantages of one technique over the other are still under debate. The aim of our study is to compare postoperative pain and analgesic drug consumption in uniportal VATS and triportal VATS for pulmonary lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer patients.

Methods

This study is a single-center, prospective, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. It is designed to compare uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (u-VATS) and three-port video-assisted thoracic surgery (t-VATS) in terms of postoperative pain. The trial will enroll 120 patients with a 1:1 randomization. The primary outcome is the assessment of analgesic drug consumption. Secondary outcomes are postoperative pain measurement, evaluation of postoperative pulmonary function, and metabolic recovery after pulmonary lobectomy.

Discussion

The choice of which VATS approach to adopt for treating patients undergoing pulmonary resection mostly depends on the surgeon’s preferences; therefore, it is hard to prove whether one VATS technique is superior to the other. Moreover, postoperative analgesic protocols vary consistently among different centers. To date, only a few studies have evaluated the effects of the most popular VATS techniques. There is no evidence about the difference between multiport VATS and u-VATS in terms of postoperative pain. We hope that the results of our trial will provide valuable information on the outcomes of these different surgical approaches.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03240250. Registered on 07 August 2017; retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05115-w.

Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for the treatment of lung cancer: a consensus report from Chinese Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (CSTCVS) and Chinese Association of Thoracic Surgeons (CATS)

Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UniVATS) has been widely adopted in China, where several ultra-high volume thoracic surgical and training centers are located. The objective of this consensus from Chinese experts was to summarize the current application and give reference for the future development of UniVATS in the treatment of lung cancer. A panel of 41 experts from 21 Chinese hospitals was invited to join this project. The Delphi method was used in this consensus consisting of two rounds of voting. The questionnaire was based on the current clinical evidence. Forty (97.6%) experts completed the 2 rounds of questionnaires. The experts’ experience was relatively similar. We defined the UniVATS as monitor-dependent surgery, no use of rib-spreading and single incision less than 4 cm. Tumor with stage of T1–T3 and N0–N2 is considered amenable to UniVATS. Other consensus was reached on several points outlining the safety and feasibility, surgical skills, learning curve, short-term and long-term outcomes for lung cancer, and current application of subxiphoid and nonintubated UniVATS approach. This consensus statement represents a collective agreement among Chinese experts to suggest that UniVATS is an effective alternative to multi-portal approach, although high-level evidence is expected in the future. Some agreements can be referred in the training of young surgeons.

Effectiveness and postoperative pain level of single-port versus two-port thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Objectives

Single-port thoracoscopic lobectomy is a new therapeutic technique for patients with lung cancer; however, insufficient data are available regarding its clinical outcomes. We therefore compared the clinical outcomes of single-port and two-port thoracoscopic lobectomies for lung cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed and compared the data of 204 and 368 patients with lung cancer who underwent single-port or two-port thoracoscopic lobectomy, respectively, between October 2014 and October 2017 at our institution. Patients in both groups underwent 1:1 propensity score matching, and 400 patients (200 patients in each group) were included. Perioperative clinical indicators were analyzed, including operation time, lymph node dissection stations and numbers, incidence of postoperative complications, and pain scores at 24 h, 72 h, and 1 week after surgery.

Results

No perioperative deaths occurred in either group. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, chest drainage duration, duration of postoperative hospital stay, lymph node dissection station and number, rate of conversion to open surgery, number of ruptured intraoperative pulmonary vessel, and incidence of postoperative complications were not significantly different between the groups (all P > 0.05). However, analysis of the 24-h (P = 0.005), 72-h (P = 0.011), and 1-week (P = 0.034) visual analog scale score after surgery revealed that the postoperative pain levels were significantly lower in the single-port than in the two-port group.

Conclusions

Single-port and two-port thoracoscopic lobectomies had similar perioperative outcomes, although the postoperative pain was lower after single-port than two-port thoracoscopic lobectomy. Hence, we concluded that single-port thoracoscopic lobectomy is an effective, minimally invasive, and promising surgical procedure.

Uniportal and three-portal video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: analysis of the Italian video-assisted thoracic surgery group database

OBJECTIVES

This study compares the uniportal with the 3-portal video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) by examining the data collected in the Italian VATS Group Database. The primary end point was early postoperative pain; secondary end points were intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical time, number of dissected lymph nodes and length of stay.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, cohort, multicentre study on data collected by 49 Italian thoracic units. Inclusion criteria were clinical stage I-II non-small-cell lung cancer, uniportal or 3-portal VATS lobectomy and R0 resection. Exclusion criteria were cT3 disease, previous thoracic malignancy, induction therapy, significant comorbidities and conversion to other techniques. The pain parameter was dichotomized: the numeric rating scale ≤3 described mild pain, whereas the numeric rating scale score >3 described moderate/severe pain. The propensity score-adjusted generalized estimating equation was used to compare the uniportal with 3-portal lobectomy.

RESULTS

Among 4338 patients enrolled from January 2014 to July 2017, 1980 met the inclusion criteria; 1808 patients underwent 3-portal lobectomy and 172 uniportal surgery. The adjusted generalized estimating equation regression model using the propensity score showed that over time pain decreased in both groups (P < 0.001). There was a statistical difference on the second and third postoperative days; odds ratio (OR) 2.28 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.62-3.21; P < 0.001] and OR 2.58 (95% CI 1.74-3.83; P < 0.001), respectively. The uniportal-VATS group had higher operative time (P < 0.001), shorter chest drain permanence (P < 0.001) and shorter length of stay (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the Italian VATS Group Database showed that in clinical practice uniportal lobectomy seems to entail a higher risk of moderate/severe pain on second and third postoperative days.

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

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.