Spontaneous Ventilation Combined with Double-Lumen Tube Intubation during Thoracic Surgery: A New Anesthesiologic Method Based on 141 Cases over Three Years

BACKGROUND

Non-intubated thoracic surgery has not achieved widespread acceptance despite its potential to improve postoperative outcomes. To ensure airway safety, our institute has developed a technique combining spontaneous ventilation with double-lumen tube intubation (SVI). This study aimed to verify the feasibility and limitations of this SVI technique.

METHODS

For the SVI method, anesthesia induction involves fentanyl and propofol target-controlled infusion, with mivacurium administration. Bispectral index monitoring was used to ensure the optimal depth of anesthesia. Short-term muscle relaxation facilitated double-lumen tube intubation and early surgical steps. Chest opening preceded local infiltration, followed by a vagal nerve blockade to prevent the cough reflex and a paravertebral blockade for pain relief. Subsequently, the muscle relaxant was ceased. The patient underwent spontaneous breathing without coughing during surgical manipulation.

RESULTS

Between 10 March 2020 and 28 October 2022, 141 SVI surgeries were performed. Spontaneous respiration with positive end-expiratory pressure was sufficient in 65.96% (93/141) of cases, whereas 31.21% (44/141) required pressure support ventilation. Only 2.84% (4/141) of cases reversed to conventional anesthetic management, owing to technical or surgical difficulties. Results of the 141 cases: The mean maximal carbon dioxide pressure was 59.01 (34.4-92.9) mmHg, and the mean lowest oxygen saturation was 93.96% (81-100%). The mean one-lung, mechanical and spontaneous one-lung ventilation time was 74.88 (20-140), 17.55 (0-115) and 57.73 (0-130) min, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous ventilation with double-lumen tube intubation is safe and feasible for thoracic surgery. The mechanical one-lung ventilation time was reduced by 76.5%, and the rate of anesthetic conversion to relaxation was low (2.8%).

Anesthetic (r)evolution from the conventional concept to the minimally invasive techniques in thoracic surgery—narrative review

Background and Objective

Thanks to the growing experience with the non-intubated anesthetic and surgical techniques, most pulmonary resections can now be performed by using minimally invasive techniques. The conventional method, i.e., surgery on the intubated, ventilated patient under general anesthesia with one-lung ventilation (OLV) was considered necessary for the major thoracoscopic lung resections for all patients. An adequate analgesic approach (regional or epidural anesthesia) allows video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) to be performed in anesthetized patients and thus the potential adverse effects related to general anesthesia and mechanical OLV can be minimized.

Methods

Multiple medical literature databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus) were searched, using the terms [(non-intubated) OR (nonintubated) OR (tubeless) OR (awake)] AND [(thoracoscopic surgery)] from 2004 to December 2021. Thirty hundred and six scientific papers were collected. The editorials, commentaries, letters, and papers were excluded, that focus on other than the non-intubated (aka awake or tubeless) VATS technique, as well as the full text scientific papers available in languages other than English.

Key Content and Findings

After reviewing the literature, we identified “schools” with different techniques but with very similar results. Most of the differences were in the anesthetic technique, oxygenation and analgesia, however, the immunological results, and the qualitative parameters (inpatient hospital care days, complication rate, mortality) of the perioperative period showed great similarity, in addition, all three schools identified the same risk factors (hypoxia, hypercapnia, airway safety). The combination of spontaneous ventilation with double lumen tube intubation, called VATS-spontaneous ventilation with intubation (SVI) method seems to be suitable for reducing these risk factors, which may serve as an alternative for patients not suitable for the non-intubated technique in the near future.

Conclusions

Based on the results, non-intubated thoracic surgery appears to be an increasingly widespread, safe procedure, that will be available to a wider range of patients as experience expands and by the implication of the constantly evolving new processes.

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.