Literature DB >> 29121474

Outcomes after Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy versus Open Lobectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer in Older Adults.

Nicole Ezer1, Minal Kale2, Keith Sigel2, Sameer Lakha3, Grace Mhango2, Emily Goodman2, Daniel Nicastri4, Scott Swanson5, Alfred Neugut6, Juan P Wisnivesky2,7.   

Abstract

RATIONALE: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open lobectomy are both standard of care for the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) because of equivalent long-term survival.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the improved perioperative outcomes associated with VATS lobectomy are explained by surgeon characteristics, including case volume and specialty training.
METHODS: We analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked registry to identify stage I-II NSCLC in patients above 65 years of age. We used a propensity score model to adjust for differences in patient characteristics undergoing VATS versus open lobectomy. Perioperative complications, extended length of stay, and perioperative mortality among patients were compared after adjustment for surgeon's volume and specialty using linear mixed models. We compared survival using a Cox model with robust standard errors.
RESULTS: We identified 9,508 patients in the registry who underwent lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC. VATS lobectomies were more commonly performed by high-volume surgeons (P < 0.001) and thoracic surgeons (P = 0.01). VATS lobectomy was associated with decreased adjusted odds of cardiovascular complications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47-0.90), thromboembolic complications (OR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.38-0.58), extrapulmonary infections (OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.61-0.94), extended length of stay (OR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.40-0.56), and perioperative mortality (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.23-0.48) even after controlling for differences in surgeon volume and specialty. Long-term survival was equivalent for VATS and open lobectomy (hazard ratio = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.85-1.08) after controlling for patient and tumor characteristics, surgeon volume, and specialization.
CONCLUSIONS: VATS lobectomy for NSCLC is associated with better postoperative outcomes, but similar long-term survival, compared with open lobectomy among older adults, even after controlling for surgeon experience.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hospital volume; open lobectomy; surgeon volume; video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29121474      PMCID: PMC5946684          DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201612-980OC

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc        ISSN: 2325-6621


  34 in total

1.  Videothoracoscopic staging and treatment of lung cancer.

Authors:  G Roviaro; F Varoli; C Rebuffat; C Vergani; M Maciocco; S M Scalambra; D Sonnino; G Gozi
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  Executive Summary: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Frank C Detterbeck; Sandra Zelman Lewis; Rebecca Diekemper; Doreen Addrizzo-Harris; W Michael Alberts
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Thoracoscopic lobectomy is associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality in patients with predicted postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second or diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide less than 40% of normal.

Authors:  Bryan M Burt; Andrzej S Kosinski; Joseph B Shrager; Mark W Onaitis; Tracey Weigel
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 5.209

4.  Thoracoscopy assisted pulmonary lobectomy.

Authors:  W S Walker; F M Carnochan; M Tin
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 9.139

5.  Identifying complications of care using administrative data.

Authors:  L I Iezzoni; J Daley; T Heeren; S M Foley; E S Fisher; C Duncan; J S Hughes; G A Coffman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Associations between hospital and surgeon procedure volumes and patient outcomes after ovarian cancer resection.

Authors:  Deborah Schrag; Craig Earle; Feng Xu; Katherine S Panageas; K Robin Yabroff; Robert E Bristow; Edward L Trimble; Joan L Warren
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Association between surgeon and hospital volume and in-hospital fatalities after lung cancer resections: the experience of an Asian country.

Authors:  Yung-Chang Lien; Ming-Te Huang; Herng-Ching Lin
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  The impact of hospital and surgeon volume on the 30-day mortality of lung cancer surgery: A nation-based reappraisal.

Authors:  Pierre-Emmanuel Falcoz; Marc Puyraveau; Caroline Rivera; Alain Bernard; Gilbert Massard; Frederic Mauny; Marcel Dahan; Pascal-Alexandre Thomas
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2014-01-25       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Methods for staging non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Gerard A Silvestri; Anne V Gonzalez; Michael A Jantz; Mitchell L Margolis; Michael K Gould; Lynn T Tanoue; Loren J Harris; Frank C Detterbeck
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 9.410

10.  Surgeons' volume-outcome relationship for lobectomies and wedge resections for cancer using video-assisted thoracoscopic techniques.

Authors:  Guy David; Candace L Gunnarsson; Matt Moore; John Howington; Daniel L Miller; Michael A Maddaus; Robert Joseph McKenna; Bryan F Meyers; Scott J Swanson
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2012-11-04
View more
  8 in total

1.  Minimally invasive thoracic surgery in lung cancer: respecting oncologic principles is the key.

Authors:  Diego Gonzalez-Rivas; William Guido-Guerrero; Albert Bolaños-Cubillo
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-12

2.  Oncologic validity of minimally invasive lobectomy for early stage lung cancer.

Authors:  Todd L Demmy; Sai Yendamuri
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Comparative Effectiveness of Surgical Approaches for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Adwaiy Manerikar; Melissa Querrey; Emily Cerier; Samuel Kim; David D Odell; Lorenzo L Pesce; Ankit Bharat
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 2.417

4.  Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for clinically stage IIIA (c-N2) NSCLC-is it justified?

Authors:  Walter Weder; Katarzyna Furrer; Isabelle Opitz
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2021-01

5.  Association between the frequency of surgeries for video-assisted thoracic surgery and the incidence of consequent surgical site infections: a retrospective observational study based on national surveillance data.

Authors:  Toshiki Kajihara; Koji Yahara; Aki Hirabayashi; Hitomi Kurosu; Motoyuki Sugai; Keigo Shibayama
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 3.090

Review 6.  A guide for managing patients with stage I NSCLC: deciding between lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, SBRT and ablation-part 3: systematic review of evidence regarding surgery in compromised patients or specific tumors.

Authors:  Brett C Bade; Justin D Blasberg; Vincent J Mase; Ulas Kumbasar; Andrew X Li; Henry S Park; Roy H Decker; David C Madoff; Whitney S Brandt; Gavitt A Woodard; Frank C Detterbeck
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 3.005

7.  Propensity score-matched comparison of robotic- and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, and open lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer patients aged 75 years or older.

Authors:  Hanbo Pan; Zenan Gu; Yu Tian; Long Jiang; Hongda Zhu; Junwei Ning; Jia Huang; Qingquan Luo
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 5.738

8.  Virtual randomized study comparing lobectomy and particle beam therapy for clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer in operable patients.

Authors:  Young-Seok Seo; Woo-Yoon Park; Si-Wook Kim; Dohun Kim; Byung Jun Min; Won-Dong Kim
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 2.724

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.