Mini-Invasive thoracic surgery for early-stage lung cancer: which is the surgeon’s best approach for video-assisted thoracic surgery?

Abstract: Objectives: The choice of the best Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) surgical approach is still debated. Surgeons are often faced with the choice between innovation and selfconfidence. The present study reports the experience of a high-volume single institute, comparing data of uni-portal, bi-portal and tri-portal VATS, to find out the safest and most effective mini-invasive approach, leading surgeon’s choice. Methods: Between 2015 and 2022, a total of 210 matched patients underwent VATS lobectomy for early-stage cancer, using uni-portal (fifth intercostal space), bi-portal (seventh space for optic and the fifth), and tri-portal (seventh and the fifth/four) access. Patients were matched for age, BPCO, smoke, comorbidities, lesions (size and staging) to obtain three homogenous groups (A: uni-portal; B: bi-portal; C: tri-portal). The surgeons had comparable expertise. Data were retrospectively collected from institutional database and analyzed. Results: No differences were detected considering time of surgery, length of hospital stay, complications, conversion rate, specific survival, and days of chest tube length of stay. Better results on chest tube removal were described in group A (mean 1.1 days) compared to B (mean 2.6 days) and C (mean 4.7 days); nevertheless, they not statistically significant (p = 0.106). Conclusions: No significant differences among the groups were described, except for the reduction in chest tube permanence in group A. This allows to hypothesize an enhanced recovery after surgery in this group but the different approaches in this series seem to guarantee comparable safety and effectiveness. Considering no superiority of one method above the others, the best suggested approach should be the one for which the surgeon feels more confident.