Literature DB >> 10588623

Prospective randomized trial comparing bilateral lung volume reduction surgery to pulmonary rehabilitation in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

G J Criner1, F C Cordova, S Furukawa, A M Kuzma, J M Travaline, V Leyenson, G M O'Brien.   

Abstract

Several uncontrolled studies report improvement in lung function, gas exchange, and exercise capacity after bilateral lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). We recruited 200 patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for a prospective randomized trial of pulmonary rehabilitation versus bilateral LVRS with stapling resection of 20 to 40% of each lung. Pulmonary function tests, gas exchange, 6-min walk distance, and symptom-limited maximal exercise testing were done in all patients at baseline and after 8 wk of rehabilitation. Patients were then randomized to either 3 additional months of rehabilitation or LVRS. Thirty-seven patients met study criteria and were enrolled into the trial. Eighteen patients were in the medical arm; 15 of 18 patients completed 3 mo of additional pulmonary rehabilitation. Thirty-two patients underwent LVRS (19 in the surgical arm, 13 crossover from the medical arm). After 8 wk of pulmonary rehabilitation, pulmonary function tests remained unchanged compared with baseline data. However, there was a trend toward a higher 6-min walk distance (285 +/- 96 versus 269 +/- 91 m, p = 0.14) and total exercise time on maximal exercise test was significantly longer compared with baseline values (7.4 +/- 2.1 versus 5.8 +/- 1.7 min, p < 0.001). In 15 patients who completed 3 mo of additional rehabilitation, there was a trend to a higher maximal oxygen consumption (V O(2)max) (13.3 +/- 3.0 versus 12.6 +/- 3.3, p < 0.08). In contrast, at 3 mo post-LVRS, FVC (2.79 +/- 0.59 versus 2.36 +/- 0.55 L, p < 0.001) and FEV(1) (0.85 +/- 0.3 versus 0.65 +/- 0.16 L, p < 0.005) increased whereas TLC (6.53 +/- 1.3 versus 7.65 +/- 2.1 L, p < 0.001) and residual volume (RV) (3.7 +/- 1.2 versus 4.9 +/- 1.1 L, p < 0.001) decreased when compared with 8 wk postrehabilitation data. In addition, Pa(CO(2)) decreased significantly 3 mo post-LVRS compared with 8 wk postrehabilitation. Six-minute walk distance (6MWD), total exercise time, and V O(2)max were higher after LVRS but did not reach statistical significance. However, when 13 patients who crossed over from the medical to the surgical arm were included in the analysis, the increases in 6MWD (337 +/- 99 versus 282 +/- 100 m, p < 0.001) and V O(2)max (13.8 +/- 4 versus 12.0 +/- 3 ml/kg/min, p < 0.01) 3 mo post-LVRS were highly significant when compared with postrehabilitation data. The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), a generalized measure of quality of life (QOL), was significantly improved after 8 wk of rehabilitation and was maintained after 3 mo of additional rehabilitation. A further improvement in QOL was observed 3 mo after LVRS compared with the initial improvement gained after 8 wk of rehabilitation. There were 3 (9.4%) postoperative deaths, and one patient died before surgery (2.7%). We conclude that bilateral LVRS, in addition to pulmonary rehabilitation, improves static lung function, gas exchange, and QOL compared with pulmonary rehabilitation alone. Further studies need to evaluate the risks, benefits, and durability of LVRS over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10588623     DOI: 10.1164/ajrccm.160.6.9902117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med        ISSN: 1073-449X            Impact factor:   21.405


  32 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances: Respiratory medicine.

Authors:  H A Kerstjens; H J Groen; W van Der Bij
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-12-08

Review 2.  Pulmonary rehabilitation.

Authors: 
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 3.  Several clinical interests regarding lung volume reduction surgery for severe emphysema: meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Wei Huang; Wen R Wang; Bo Deng; You Q Tan; Guang Y Jiang; Hai Jing Zhou; Yong He
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 1.637

Review 4.  Preoperative predictors of outcome following lung volume reduction surgery.

Authors:  F C Sciurba
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 9.139

5.  Altered thoracic gas compression contributes to improvement in spirometry with lung volume reduction surgery.

Authors:  A Sharafkhaneh; S Goodnight-White; T M Officer; J R Rodarte; A M Boriek
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 9.139

6.  Relation of interlobar collaterals to radiological heterogeneity in severe emphysema.

Authors:  T Higuchi; A Reed; T Oto; L Holsworth; S Ellis; M J Bailey; T J Williams; G I Snell
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2006-02-07       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 7.  Lung volume reduction surgery or bronchoscopic lung volume reduction: is there an algorithm for allocation?

Authors:  Matthew Gordon; Sean Duffy; Gerard J Criner
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 8.  Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 10: Bullectomy, lung volume reduction surgery, and transplantation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  B F Meyers; G A Patterson
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 9.  Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction in severe emphysema.

Authors:  Edward P Ingenito; Douglas E Wood; James P Utz
Journal:  Proc Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2008-05-01

Review 10.  Surgical and endoscopic treatment for COPD: patients selection, techniques and results.

Authors:  Fabrizio Minervini; Peter B Kestenholz; Valentina Paolini; Alberto Pesci; Lidia Libretti; Luca Bertolaccini; Marco Scarci
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.