Does muscle-sparing thoracotomy as opposed to posterolateral thoracotomy result in better recovery?

A best evidence topic was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether muscle-sparing thoracotomy (MST), as opposed to posterolateral thoracotomy (PLT), results in better recovery. A total of 108 papers were found using the reported searches of which eight represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, date, journal, study type, population, main outcome measures and results are tabulated. A recent large prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled study demonstrated a shorter length of stay in patients undergoing MST. It failed to demonstrate any significant difference in pain reported or pulmonary function. A separate prospective randomized controlled trial focussed on pain, pulmonary function, late shoulder range of motion and late muscle strength. It failed to show any significant difference in these domains between PLT and MST. While the mean 'opening time' is greater when performing a MST, this is negated by a shorter mean 'closing time' when compared with PLT. Overall, the evidence suggests that MST results in greater early (1 week) preservation of skeletal muscle strength and range of motion over PLT. This difference has disappeared at 1 month. There is little evidence to suggest a difference in pulmonary function or pain dependent on the thoracotomy type. Moreover, analgesic consumption is similar. However, there is an inverse relationship between the incision length and the post-thoracotomy syndrome.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes