Background: Here, we report our initial experience with subxifoid video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SVATS) lobectomy for the management of primary lung cancer, and compared the outcomes of SVATS with those of conventional transthoracic VATS (CVATS) lobectomies to validate its feasibility and usefulness. Methods: The clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing VATS lobectomy via SVATS or CVATS for lung cancer were retrospectively compared. The endpoints were to evaluate the statistical differences in surgical results, postoperative pain (measured with visual analog scale [VAS] scores at 8 hours, Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, at discharge, one month and three months after surgery) and paresthesia (measured at one- month, and three months after surgery). The two groups were compared before and after matching analysis. Results: Our study population included 223 patients: 84 in the SVATS and 139 in the CVATS group. The two groups were not comparable for sex (P = 0.001), preoperative comorbidity as cardiopathy (P = 0.007), BMI value (P = 0.003), left-sided procedure (P = 0.04), tumor stage (P = 0.04), and tumor size (P = 0.002). These differences were overcome by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis that yielded two well-matched groups which included 61 patients in each group. Surgical outcomes including blood loss, hospital stay and complications were similar before and after matching analysis, but SVATS compared to CVATS was associated with longer operative time before (159 ± 13 vs. 126 ± 6.3, P < 0.0001), and after matching analysis (161 ± 23 vs. 119 ± 8.3; P < 0.0001) and significant reduction of postoperative pain during the different time-points (P < 0.001), and paresthesia at one (P = 0.001), and three months (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: SVATS lobectomy is a feasible and safe strategy with surgical outcomes similar to CVATS lobectomy but with less postoperative pain and paresthesia. Key points: Significant findings of the study: Subxifoid thoracoscopic lobectomy is a feasible and safe procedure, with potential benefits in terms of postoperative pain and paresthesia compared to conventional thoracoscopic lobectomy Our results showed that surgical outcomes including blood loss, hospital stay, morbidity and mortality are similar but subxifoid thoracoscopy was associated with significant reduction of postoperative pain and paresthesia. What this study adds: Subxifoid thoracoscopy is a safe procedure; compared to conventional transthoracic thoracoscopy, it avoids intercostal incisions, and spares nerve trauma, resulting in a reduction of postoperative pain and paresthesia.

Subxifoid versus transthoracic thoracoscopic lobectomy: results of a retrospective analysis before and after matching analysis / Andreetti, C.; Peritore, V.; Ibrahim, M.; Gagliardi, A.; Argento, G.; Maurizi, G.; Teodonio, L.; Serra, N.; Rendina, E. A.; Santini, M.; Fiorelli, A.. - In: THORACIC CANCER. - ISSN 1759-7706. - 12:9(2021), pp. 1279-1290. [10.1111/1759-7714.13778]

Subxifoid versus transthoracic thoracoscopic lobectomy: results of a retrospective analysis before and after matching analysis

Andreetti C.;Peritore V.;Ibrahim M.;Argento G.;Maurizi G.;Teodonio L.;Rendina E. A.;
2021

Abstract

Background: Here, we report our initial experience with subxifoid video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SVATS) lobectomy for the management of primary lung cancer, and compared the outcomes of SVATS with those of conventional transthoracic VATS (CVATS) lobectomies to validate its feasibility and usefulness. Methods: The clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing VATS lobectomy via SVATS or CVATS for lung cancer were retrospectively compared. The endpoints were to evaluate the statistical differences in surgical results, postoperative pain (measured with visual analog scale [VAS] scores at 8 hours, Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, at discharge, one month and three months after surgery) and paresthesia (measured at one- month, and three months after surgery). The two groups were compared before and after matching analysis. Results: Our study population included 223 patients: 84 in the SVATS and 139 in the CVATS group. The two groups were not comparable for sex (P = 0.001), preoperative comorbidity as cardiopathy (P = 0.007), BMI value (P = 0.003), left-sided procedure (P = 0.04), tumor stage (P = 0.04), and tumor size (P = 0.002). These differences were overcome by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis that yielded two well-matched groups which included 61 patients in each group. Surgical outcomes including blood loss, hospital stay and complications were similar before and after matching analysis, but SVATS compared to CVATS was associated with longer operative time before (159 ± 13 vs. 126 ± 6.3, P < 0.0001), and after matching analysis (161 ± 23 vs. 119 ± 8.3; P < 0.0001) and significant reduction of postoperative pain during the different time-points (P < 0.001), and paresthesia at one (P = 0.001), and three months (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: SVATS lobectomy is a feasible and safe strategy with surgical outcomes similar to CVATS lobectomy but with less postoperative pain and paresthesia. Key points: Significant findings of the study: Subxifoid thoracoscopic lobectomy is a feasible and safe procedure, with potential benefits in terms of postoperative pain and paresthesia compared to conventional thoracoscopic lobectomy Our results showed that surgical outcomes including blood loss, hospital stay, morbidity and mortality are similar but subxifoid thoracoscopy was associated with significant reduction of postoperative pain and paresthesia. What this study adds: Subxifoid thoracoscopy is a safe procedure; compared to conventional transthoracic thoracoscopy, it avoids intercostal incisions, and spares nerve trauma, resulting in a reduction of postoperative pain and paresthesia.
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Andreetti_Subxifoid-versus-transthoracic_2020.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 2.88 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.88 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1548858
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact