STUDY OBJECTIVES: In 1996, researchers in Sweden initiated a collaborative randomized study comparing lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) and physical training with physical training alone. The primary end point was health status; secondary end points included survival and physiologic measurements. DESIGN: After an initial 6-week physical training program, researchers' patients were randomized to either LVRS (surgical group [SG]) with continued training for 3 months, or to continued training alone (training group [TG]) for 1 year. SETTING:All seven thoracic surgery centers in Sweden. PATIENTS: All patients in Sweden with severe emphysema fulfilling inclusion criteria for LVRS. INTERVENTIONS: Patients randomized to surgery underwent a median sternotomy, except for a few patients in whom thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopy were performed. In the TG, supervised physical training continued for 1 year; in the SG, supervised physical training continued for 3 months postoperatively. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS:Fifty-three patients were included in each group. Six in-hospital deaths occurred after surgery (12%), and one more death occurred during follow-up. Two deaths occurred in the TG. The difference in death rates between the groups was not statistically significant. Health status, as measured by St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) [total scale score mean difference at 1 year, 14.7; 95% confidence interval (CI), 9.8 to 19.7] as well as by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey (physical function scale score mean difference at 1 year, 19.7; 95% CI, 12.1 to 27.3) was improved from baseline in the SG compared with the TG. FEV(1), residual volume, and shuttle walking test values also improved in the SG but not in the TG after 6 months and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In severe emphysema, LVRS can improve health status in survivors but is associated with mortality risk. The effects are stable for at least 1 year. Physical training alone failed to achieve a similar improvement.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVES: In 1996, researchers in Sweden initiated a collaborative randomized study comparing lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) and physical training with physical training alone. The primary end point was health status; secondary end points included survival and physiologic measurements. DESIGN: After an initial 6-week physical training program, researchers' patients were randomized to either LVRS (surgical group [SG]) with continued training for 3 months, or to continued training alone (training group [TG]) for 1 year. SETTING: All seven thoracic surgery centers in Sweden. PATIENTS: All patients in Sweden with severe emphysema fulfilling inclusion criteria for LVRS. INTERVENTIONS:Patients randomized to surgery underwent a median sternotomy, except for a few patients in whom thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopy were performed. In the TG, supervised physical training continued for 1 year; in the SG, supervised physical training continued for 3 months postoperatively. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included in each group. Six in-hospital deaths occurred after surgery (12%), and one more death occurred during follow-up. Two deaths occurred in the TG. The difference in death rates between the groups was not statistically significant. Health status, as measured by St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) [total scale score mean difference at 1 year, 14.7; 95% confidence interval (CI), 9.8 to 19.7] as well as by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey (physical function scale score mean difference at 1 year, 19.7; 95% CI, 12.1 to 27.3) was improved from baseline in the SG compared with the TG. FEV(1), residual volume, and shuttle walking test values also improved in the SG but not in the TG after 6 months and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In severe emphysema, LVRS can improve health status in survivors but is associated with mortality risk. The effects are stable for at least 1 year. Physical training alone failed to achieve a similar improvement.
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
Authors: Marquita R Decker; Glen E Leverson; Wassim Abi Jaoude; James D Maloney Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Margaret L Snyder; Christopher H Goss; Blazej Neradilek; Nayak L Polissar; Zab Mosenifar; Robert A Wise; Alfred P Fishman; Joshua O Benditt Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2008-06-05 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Denis E O'Donnell; Shaw Aaron; Jean Bourbeau; Paul Hernandez; Darcy D Marciniuk; Meyer Balter; Gordon Ford; Andre Gervais; Rogers Goldstein; Rick Hodder; Alan Kaplan; Sean Keenan; Yves Lacasse; Francois Maltais; Jeremy Road; Graeme Rocker; Don Sin; Tasmin Sinuff; Nha Voduc Journal: Can Respir J Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 2.409
Authors: Gerard J Criner; Antoine Delage; Kirk Voelker; D Kyle Hogarth; Adnan Majid; Michael Zgoda; Donald R Lazarus; Roberto Casal; Sadia B Benzaquen; Robert C Holladay; Adam Wellikoff; Karel Calero; Mark J Rumbak; Paul R Branca; Muhanned Abu-Hijleh; Jorge M Mallea; Ravi Kalhan; Ashutosh Sachdeva; C Matthew Kinsey; Carla R Lamb; Michael F Reed; Wissam B Abouzgheib; Phillip V Kaplan; Gregory X Marrujo; David W Johnstone; Mario G Gasparri; Arturo A Meade; Christopher A Hergott; Chakravarthy Reddy; Richard A Mularski; Amy Hajari Case; Samir S Makani; Ray W Shepherd; Benson Chen; Gregory E Holt; Simon Martel Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 21.405