Mini-Invasive Thoracic Surgery for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: Which Is the Surgeon’s Best Approach for Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery?

<b>Objectives:</b> The choice of the best Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) surgical approach is still debated. Surgeons are often faced with the choice between innovation and self-confidence. The present study reports the experience of a high-volume single institute, comparing data of uni-portal, bi-portal and tri-portal VATS, to find out the safest and most effective mini-invasive approach, leading surgeon's choice. <b>Methods:</b> Between 2015 and 2022, a total of 210 matched patients underwent VATS lobectomy for early-stage cancer, using uni-portal (fifth intercostal space), bi-portal (seventh space for optic and the fifth), and tri-portal (seventh and the fifth/four) access. Patients were matched for age, BPCO, smoke, comorbidities, lesions (size and staging) to obtain three homogenous groups (A: uni-portal; B: bi-portal; C: tri-portal). The surgeons had comparable expertise. Data were retrospectively collected from institutional database and analyzed. <b>Results:</b> No differences were detected considering time of surgery, length of hospital stay, complications, conversion rate, specific survival, and days of chest tube length of stay. Better results on chest tube removal were described in group A (mean 1.1 days) compared to B (mean 2.6 days) and C (mean 4.7 days); nevertheless, they not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.106). <b>Conclusions:</b> No significant differences among the groups were described, except for the reduction in chest tube permanence in group A. This allows to hypothesize an enhanced recovery after surgery in this group but the different approaches in this series seem to guarantee comparable safety and effectiveness. Considering no superiority of one method above the others, the best suggested approach should be the one for which the surgeon feels more confident.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13216447
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.68
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mini-Invasive Thoracic Surgery for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: Which Is the Surgeon’s Best Approach for Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery?

Claudio Andreetti, Giacomo Argento, Erino Angelo Rendina, Mohsen Ibrahim et al.
4 citations
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
1.68
article

Mini-Invasive Thoracic Surgery for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: Which Is the Surgeon’s Best Approach for Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery?

Claudio Andreetti, Giacomo Argento, Erino Angelo Rendina, Mohsen Ibrahim, F. Messa, Cecilia Menna, Matteo Tiracorrendo, Antonio D’Andrilli, Alessandra Siciliani, Giulio Maurizi, Camilla Vanni, Giorgia Piccioni, Beatrice Trabalza Marinucci, Anna Maria Ciccone
article en
4 citations

Abstract

<b>Objectives:</b> The choice of the best Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) surgical approach is still debated. Surgeons are often faced with the choice between innovation and self-confidence. The present study reports the experience of a high-volume single institute, comparing data of uni-portal, bi-portal and tri-portal VATS, to find out the safest and most effective mini-invasive approach, leading surgeon's choice. <b>Methods:</b> Between 2015 and 2022, a total of 210 matched patients underwent VATS lobectomy for early-stage cancer, using uni-portal (fifth intercostal space), bi-portal (seventh space for optic and the fifth), and tri-portal (seventh and the fifth/four) access. Patients were matched for age, BPCO, smoke, comorbidities, lesions (size and staging) to obtain three homogenous groups (A: uni-portal; B: bi-portal; C: tri-portal). The surgeons had comparable expertise. Data were retrospectively collected from institutional database and analyzed. <b>Results:</b> No differences were detected considering time of surgery, length of hospital stay, complications, conversion rate, specific survival, and days of chest tube length of stay. Better results on chest tube removal were described in group A (mean 1.1 days) compared to B (mean 2.6 days) and C (mean 4.7 days); nevertheless, they not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.106). <b>Conclusions:</b> No significant differences among the groups were described, except for the reduction in chest tube permanence in group A. This allows to hypothesize an enhanced recovery after surgery in this group but the different approaches in this series seem to guarantee comparable safety and effectiveness. Considering no superiority of one method above the others, the best suggested approach should be the one for which the surgeon feels more confident.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 13(21)
Azienda Ospedaliera Sant'Andrea (IT)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
1.68
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.