Search

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which comprises pulmonary embolus (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is a significant cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality. This pilot randomized control trial (RCT) evaluated the feasibility of a full-scale RCT investigating extended thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing oncological lung resections. Patients undergoing oncological lung resections in 2 tertiary centers received in-hospital, thromboprophylaxis and were randomized to receive post-discharge low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or placebo injections once-daily for 30 days. At 30 days postoperatively, all patients underwent chest computed tomography with PE protocol and bilateral leg venous ultrasound. Primary outcomes included feasibility and safety; VTE incidence and 90-day survival were secondary outcomes. Between December 2015 and June 2018, 619 patients were screened, of whom 62.7% (165/263) of eligible patients consented to participate, and 133 (81%) were randomized. One-hundred and 3 patients, (77.4%), completed the 90-day study follow-up. Reasons for non-participation pre-randomization included patient discomfort and LMWH/placebo administration challenges. Post-randomization withdrawals were due to patient preference, surgeon preference and minor adverse events. Six asymptomatic VTE events (5 PE and 1 DVT) were detected within 30 days (3 in each group), for an overall incidence of 7%. There were 3 minor and no major adverse events. This study is the first to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of a full-scale extended thromboprophylaxis RCT in thoracic surgical oncology. Our results demonstrate that, while recruitment and retention rates were modest, the study design is feasible and with minimal adverse events and no intervention-related mortality., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The objective of the study was to evaluate the Integrated Comprehensive Care (ICC) program, a novel health system integration initiative that coordinates home care and hospital-based clinical services for patients undergoing major thoracic surgery relative to traditional home care delivery. Methods included a pilot retrospective cohort analysis that compared the intervention cohort (ICC), composed of all patients undergoing major thoracic surgery in the 2012-2013 fiscal year with a control cohort, who underwent surgery in the year before the initiation of ICC. Length of stay, hospital costs, readmission, and emergency room visit data were stratified by degree and approach of resection and compared using univariate logistic regression analysis. A total of 331 patients under ICC and 355 control patients were enrolled. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients under video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) ICC (sublobar median 3 vs 4 days, P = 0.013; lobar median 4 vs 5 days, P = 0.051) but not for open resections. The frequency of emergency room visits within 60 days of surgery was lower for all stratification groups in the ICC cohort, except for VATS sublobar (25.7% control vs 13.9% ICC, P = 0.097). There were no significant differences in 60-day readmission frequency in any subcohort. The mean inpatient case cost was significantly lower for ICC VATS sublobar resections ($8505.39 vs $11,038.18, P = 0.007), with the other resection types trending lower for ICC but nonsignificant. In conclusion, a hospital-based, postdischarge, patient-centered program could potentially result in shorter hospital stay, fewer readmission and emergency room visits, costsavings, and no increase in adverse postdischarge outcomes after major thoracic surgery., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The primary objective of this study is to systematically review all pertinent literature related to robotic-assisted lung resection. Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) case series and studies comparing RATS with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or thoracotomy were included in the search. In accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, 2 independent reviewers performed the search and review of resulting titles and abstracts. Following full-text screening, a total of 20 articles met the inclusion criteria and are presented in the review. Amenable results were pooled and presented as a single outcome, and meta-analyses were performed for outcomes having more than 3 comparative analyses. Data are presented in the following 4 categories: technical outcomes, perioperative outcomes, oncological outcomes, and cost comparison. RATS was associated with longer operative time, but did not result in a greater rate of conversion to thoracotomy than VATS. RATS was superior to thoracotomy and equivalent to VATS for the incidence of prolonged air leak and hospital length-of-stay. Oncological outcomes like nodal upstaging and survival were no different between VATS and RATS. RATS was more costly than VATS, with most of the costs attributed to capital and disposable expenses of the robotic platform. Although limited by a lack of prospective analysis, lung resection via RATS compares favorably with thoracotomy and appears to be no different than VATS. Prospective studies are required to determine if there are outcome differences between RATS and VATS., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Survivors of lung cancer surgery are among the highest-risk patients for developing another lung cancer, yet there is no clear consensus on the method of surveillance for patients after curative surgical resection. Surveillance is no longer futile because the emergence of computed tomography screening has allowed the detection of recurrences and new metachronous cancers at an early stage. In selected patients, lung cancer identified recently on routine computed tomography scan is amenable to curative treatment and is associated with longer survival., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)