Developing a minimally-invasive anaesthesiological approach to non-intubated uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in minor and major thoracic surgery

Current New Approach in Thoracoscopic Surgery: Non-Intubated Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (NI-UniVATS)

Background and Objectives: Non-intubated uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (NI-UniVATS) is a minimally invasive technique performed using a single port, allowing the entire surgical procedure to be completed with spontaneous breathing without the need for general anesthesia. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 51 patients who underwent NI-UniVATS between 2020 and 2023. The intraoperative and postoperative data of patients who underwent NI-UniVATS were evaluated. Results: Among the cases, 37 (72.5%) were male, and 14 (46.6%) were female, with a mean age of 47.73 ± 20.43 years (range: 18-78 years). The mean operative time was 25.92 ± 7.31 min. No perioperative complications were observed in any patient. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.17 ± 1.76 days (range: 2-9 days). A right hemithoracic approach was performed in 28 patients (54.9%), whereas a left hemithoracic approach was used in 23 patients (45.1%). The procedures performed included wedge resection in 27 patients (52.9%), biopsy in 22 patients (43.1%), pericardial window creation in one patient (2%), and intrathoracic foreign body removal in one patient (2%). Conclusions: NI-UniVATS allows for safer surgery by preventing the adverse effects and complications associated with general anesthesia. NI-UniVATS can be recommended as a safe and feasible approach for both minor and major thoracic procedures.

Nonintubated video-assisted thoracic surgery: myth or reality?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses nonintubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (NIVATS) by presenting its physiological, technical aspects and recent clinical data from the literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last two decades, NIVATS has gained traction as an alternative to traditional intubated thoracic surgery, offering potential benefits in terms of reduced complications, faster recovery times, and improved patient satisfaction. Several approaches to this technique have been described in the literature, mainly divided into the awake patient technique (awake-NIVATS) and the asleep patient technique (asleep-NIVATS). The availability of various sedatives, numerous devices to ensure good oxygenation, and the countless loco-regional techniques available today for pain control in the thoracic region offer the possibility to develop many anesthesia protocols in this context. Numerous studies have already shown that NIVATS is feasible and safe with proper patient selection and adequate collaboration of the surgical team. Some studies have also shown that NIVATS may improve patient outcomes, but the evidence is still limited.

SUMMARY

Literature has demonstrated the feasibility of NIVATS and suggest that it can improve patient outcomes. High-quality international randomized multicenter studies comparing NIVATS and intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery are necessary for a strong comprehension to clarify whether it can be a technique that can guarantee safety and improve the perioperative course of patients.

[Non-Intubated Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (niVATS)]

Non-intubated minimally invasive lung surgery garnered renewed interest during the past decade and many centers across the country successfully implemented the technique for minor procedures like pleurodesis or wedge resection. Anatomical lung resection under spontaneous breathing still is considered as challenging, and as existing data to support it is conflicting and confusing, the approach remains limited to few dedicated outfits. We seek to present the historical perspective, critically report potential advantages and limitations of the technique and hand out a guideline that might prove to be helpful in building up a dedicated program.

Combined use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker vs. a double-lumen endobronchial tube in thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The combined use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker may reduce postoperative hoarseness and sore throat. We aimed to test the feasibility and efficacy of this combination technique in thoracoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

A single-center, patient-assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Nagoya City University Hospital (between November 2020 and April 2022).

PATIENTS

A total of 100 adult patients undergoing lobectomy or segmentectomy by video- or robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to either group using a combination of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and a bronchial blocker (pLMA+BB group) or a double-lumen endobronchial tube (DLT group).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the hoarseness incidence on 1-3 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes included sore throat, intraoperative complications (hypoxemia, hypercapnia, surgical interruption, malposition of devices, unintended lung expansion, and ventilatory difficulty), lung collapse, device placement-related outcomes, and coughing during emergence.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 100 patients underwent randomization (51 to the pLMA+BB group and 49 to the DLT group). After drop outs, a total of 49 patients in each group were analyzed per-protocol. The incidences of hoarseness in the pLMA+BB and DLT groups were 42.9% and 53.1% (difference, -10.2%; 95% confidence interval, -30.1% to 10.3%; p = 0.419), 18.4% vs. 32.7%, and 20.4% vs. 24.5% on postoperative day 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The incidences of sore throat in the pLMA+BB and DLT groups were 16.3% vs. 34.7% (difference, -18.4%; 95% confidence interval, -35.9% to -0.9%; p = 0.063) on postoperative day 1. In the pLMA+BB group, more intraoperative complications and less coughing during emergence were observed compared to the DLT group. Lung collapse and placement-related outcomes were comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and bronchial blocker did not significantly reduce hoarseness compared to the double-lumen endobronchial tube.

Protocol for the derivation and external validation of a 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) risk prediction model for elderly patients undergoing thoracic surgery: a cohort study in southern China

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) occur after up to 60% of non-cardiac thoracic surgery (NCTS), especially for multimorbid elderly patients. Nevertheless, current risk prediction models for PPCs have major limitations regarding derivation and validation, and do not account for the specific risks of NCTS patients. Well-founded and externally validated models specific to elderly NCTS patients are warranted to inform consent and treatment decisions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will develop, internally and externally validate a multivariable risk model to predict 30-day PPCs in elderly NCTS patients. Our cohort will be generated in three study sites in southern China with a target population of approximately 1400 between October 2021 and December 2023. Candidate predictors have been selected based on published data, clinical expertise and epidemiological knowledge. Our model will be derived using the combination of multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapping technique to lessen predictors. The final model will be internally validated using bootstrapping validation technique and externally validated using data from different study sites. A parsimonious risk score will then be developed on the basis of beta estimates derived from the logistic model. Model performance will be evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, max-rescaled Brier score and calibration slope. In exploratory analysis, we will also assess the net benefit of Probability of PPCs Associated with THoracic surgery in elderly patients score in the complete cohort using decision curve analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the Affiliated Cancer Hospital and Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine and the University of Hongkong-Shenzhen Hospital, respectively. The final risk prediction model will be published in an appropriate journal and further disseminated as an online calculator or nomogram for clinical application. Approved and anonymised data will be shared.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100051170.

Non-Intubated Thoracic Surgery: Standpoints and Perspectives

Non-intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (NI-VATS) combines the advantages of a non-intubated surgery with the benefits of a minimally invasive approach. First, NI-VATS is performed in the case of fragile patients when general anesthesia and/or orotracheal intubation can be foreseen as inconvenient. However, NI-VATS indications have been increasingly extended to different patient conditions, considering the increasingly assessed safety and feasibility of the procedure. Currently, the NI-VATS approach is used worldwide for different thoracic surgery procedures, including the management of malignant pleural effusion, surgical treatment of empyema, anatomical and non-anatomical lung resection, and other indications. In fact, this approach has shown to be less impactful than VATS under general anesthesia, allowing for shortened hospitalization and faster recovery after surgery. Besides, NI-VATS is associated with fewer pulmonary complications, less respiratory distress, and a mild systemic inflammatory reaction. For these reasons, this approach should be considered not only in patients with poor cardiac or respiratory function (general functional reserve), but also in other eligible conditions.

We explored the anesthetic and surgical aspects of such an approach, including the management of analgesia, cough reflex, depth of sedation, and intraoperative technical issues to put this approach in perspective.

[Current approaches to anesthetic management in thoracic surgery-An evaluation from the German Thoracic Registry]

BACKGROUND

While many hospitals in Germany perform thoracic surgery, anesthetic techniques and methods that are actually used are usually only known for individual departments. This study describes the general anesthetic management of three typical thoracic surgical procedures across multiple institutions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The German Thoracic Registry recorded 4614 patients in 5 institutions between 2016 and 2019. Hospitals with a minimum number of more than 50 thoracic procedures per year are eligible for inclusion in the registry. To analyze the anesthetic management, a matching process yielded three comparable patient groups (n = 1506) that differed solely in the surgical procedure. Three surgical procedures with varying degrees of invasiveness were selected: Group A = video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) with wedge resection, group B = VATS with lobectomy, group C = open thoracotomy. Statistical analysis was performed descriptively using relative and absolute frequencies. Dichotomous variables were compared using the χ²-test.

RESULTS

The study enrolled patients with a median age of 65.6 years. The mean value of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification was 2.8. One lung ventilation was most commonly performed (group A = 98.2%, group B = 99.4%, group C = 98.0%) with double lumen tubes (DLT). Bronchial blockers (group A = 0.2%, group B = 0.4%, group C = 0%) were rarely used. Primary bronchoscopy was used to control double lumen tubes after insertion in the majority of cases (group A = 77.5%, group B = 73.1%, group C= 79.7%). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, group A = 1.2%, group B = 1.4%, group C = 5.1%) and jet ventilation (group A = 1.6%, group B = 1.6%, group C = 1.4%) were rarely used intraoperatively. In group C, the administration of a vasopressor was also more frequently required (group A = 59.9%, group B = 77.8%, group C = 86%). A central venous catheter was established in 30.1% of all patients in group A, 39.8% in group B and 73.3% in group C. Patients in group A received an arterial catheter less frequently (71.7%) when compared to groups B (96.4%) and C (95.2%). Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol was used in most patients (group A = 67.7%, group B 61.6%, group C 75.7%). Propofol supplemented by volatile anesthetics was used less frequently (group A = 28.5%, group B = 35.5%, group C = 23.7%). With increasing invasiveness of the surgical procedure, placement of an epidural catheter was preferred (group A = 18.9%, group B = 29.5%, group C = 64.1%). Paravertebral catheters (group A = 7.6%, group B = 4.4%, group C = 4.8%) or a single infiltration of the paravertebral space were performed less frequently (group A = 7.8%, group B = 17.7%, group C = 11.6%). Postoperatively, some patients (3.4-25.7%) were transferred to the general ward. The largest proportion of patients transferred to a general ward underwent less invasive thoracic procedures (group A). When the extent of resection was greater (group B and group C) patients were mostly transferred to an intermediate care unit (IMC) or an intensive care unit (ICU). The insertion of invasive catheters was neither associated with the patients' ASA classification nor preoperative pathologic pulmonary function.

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that less invasive thoracic operations are associated with a reduction of invasive anesthetic procedures. As the presented data are descriptive, further studies are required to determine the impact of invasive anesthetic procedures on patient-related outcomes. This evaluation of the anesthetic management in experienced thoracic anesthesiology departments represents the next step towards establishing national quality standards and promoting structural quality in thoracic anesthesia.

Non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery under combination of erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block

Background

The use of anesthetics and analgesic drugs and techniques in combination yields a multimodal effect with increased efficiency. In this case series, we aimed to evaluate the anesthetic effect of the thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) and erector spinae plane block (ESPB) combination in patients, who underwent non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (NIVATS).

Methods

Medical records of 16 patients, who underwent NIVATS for wedge resection under the combination of ESPB and TPVB were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic data of patients, duration of the sensory block, amount of the anesthetic agent used for premedication and sedo-analgesia, any presence of perioperative cough, operative times, postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores in the postoperative follow-up period, the need for additional analgesia, and patient satisfaction were reviewed.

Results

Of the patients included in the study, 12 were men and 4 were women. The mean age was 48.6 years and the mean BMI was 24.7 kg/m². The mean time needed for the achievement of the sensorial block was 14 min and the mean skin-to-skin operative time was 21.4 min. During the procedure, patients received 81.5 ± 27.7 mg of propofol and 30 ± 13.6 micrograms of remifentanil infusions, respectively. The mean dose of ketamine administered in total was 58.1 ± 12.2 mg. Only 2 patients needed an extra dose of remifentanil because of recurrent cough. No patients developed postoperative nausea vomiting. During the first 24 h, the VAS static scores of the patients were 3 and below, while VAS dynamic scores were 4 and below. Morphine consumption in the first postoperative 24 h was 13.2 mg.

Conclusions

In conclusion, combined ESPB and TPVB with added intravenous sedo-analgesia in the presence of good cooperation between the surgical team and the anesthesiologist in the perioperative period can provide optimal surgical conditions including the prevention of cough in NIVATS. It is not sufficient to state that this combination is superior to alone ESPB or alone TPVB, as it is a preliminary study with a limited number of cases.

The Anesthesiologist's Perspective Regarding Non-intubated Thoracic Surgery: A Scoping Review

Non-intubated thoracic surgery (NITS) is a growing practice, alongside minimally invasive thoracic surgery. To date, only a consensus of experts provided opinions on NITS leaving a number of questions unresolved. We then conducted a scoping review to clarify the state of the art regarding NITS. The systematic review of all randomized and non-randomized clinical trials dealing with NITS, based on Pubmed, EMBASE, and Scopus, retrieved 665 articles. After the exclusion of ineligible studies, 53 were assessed examining: study type, Country of origin, surgical procedure, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist's physical status, airway management device, conversion to orotracheal intubation and pulmonary complications rates and length of hospital stay. It emerged that NITS is a procedure performed predominantly in Asia, and certain European Countries. In China, NITS is more frequently performed for parenchymal resection surgery, whereas in Europe, it is mainly employed for pleural pathologies. The most commonly used device for airway management is the laryngeal mask. The conversion rate to orotracheal intubation is a~3%. The results of the scoping review seem to suggest that NITS procedures are becoming increasingly popular, but its role needs to be better defined. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to better define the role of the clinical variables possibly impacting on the technique effectiveness.

Systematic Review Registration

https://osf.io/mfvp3/, identifier: 10.17605/OSF.IO/MFVP3.

Non-intubated Thoracoscopic Surgery-Tips and Tricks From Anesthesiological Aspects: A Mini Review

Background

In the last few decades, surgical techniques have been developed in thoracic surgery, and minimally invasive strategies such as multi-and uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) have become more favorable even for major pulmonary resections. With this surgical evolution, the aesthetic approach has also changed, and a paradigm shift has occurred. The traditional conception of general anesthesia, muscle relaxation, and intubation has been re-evaluated, and spontaneous breathing plays a central role in our practice by performing non-intubated thoracoscopic surgeries (NITS-VATS).

Methods

We performed a computerized search of the medical literature (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus) to identify relevant articles in non-intubated thoracoscopic surgery using the following terms [(non-intubated) OR (non-intubated) OR (awake) OR (tubeless) OR (regional anesthesia)] AND [(VATS) OR (NIVATS)], as well as their Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms.

Results

Based on the outcomes of the reviewed literature and our practice, it seems that pathophysiological concerns can be overcome by proper surgical and anesthetic management. All risks are compensated by the advantageous physiological changes that result in better patient outcomes. With the maintenance of spontaneous breathing, the incidence of potential adverse effects of mechanical ventilation, such as ventilator-induced lung injury and consequent postoperative pulmonary complications, can be reduced. The avoidance of muscle relaxants also results in the maintenance of contraction of the dependent hemidiaphragm and lower airway pressure levels, which may lead to better ventilation-perfusion matching. These techniques can be challenging for surgeons as well as for anesthetists; hence, a good knowledge of physiological and pathophysiological changes, clear inclusion and exclusion and intraoperative conversion criteria, and good communication between team members are essential.

Conclusion

NITS-VATS seems to be a feasible and safe method in selected patients with evolving importance as a part of the minimally invasive surgical and anesthetic conception and has a role in reducing perioperative complications, which is crucial in the thoracic surgical patient population.

Converting to Intubation During Non-intubated Thoracic Surgery: Incidence, Indication, Technique, and Prevention

Traditionally, intubated general anesthesia with one-lung ventilation is standard in thoracoscopic surgery. However, in recent decades, non-intubated thoracoscopic surgery (NITS) has become an alternative method to minimize the adverse effects of intubated general anesthesia. Non-intubated procedures result in fewer adverse events than tracheal intubation and general anesthesia, such as intubation-related airway injury, ventilation-induced lung injury, prolonged hospital stay, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Despite these benefits, surgeons must consider the possibility of converting to intubation during NITS as the conversion rate is between 2 and 11%, varying between regions and learning time. The conversion rate is also affected by race, body size, the learning curve, and the surgical team's preferred methods. There are surgical (e.g., significant respiratory movements, uncontrolled bleeding, hindered surgical fields, large tumor sizes, adhesions) and anesthetic (e.g., hypoxemia, hypercapnia, airway spasms) reasons for converting to intubation. When a conversion is deemed necessary by the surgical team, the members should be well-prepared and act rapidly. Anesthesiologists should also feel comfortable intubating patients in the lateral decubitus position with or without bronchoscopic guidance. Patient selection is the key factor for avoiding conversion into an intubated surgery. Patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 2 or less, a body mass index <25, and less surgical complexity may be good candidates for NITS. Careful monitoring, adequate anesthesia depth, an experienced surgical team, and sufficient preparation can also prevent conversion. Conversion from a non-intubated into intubated thoracic surgery is unwanted but not inevitable. Therefore, NITS can be successful when performed on select patients by a well-prepared and experienced surgical team and is worthy of recommendation owing to its non-invasiveness.