Abstract

BackgroundInvasion of the chest wall per se is not a contraindication for tumor resection in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), provided there is no mediastinal lymph node or vital structure involvement. Although widely known to Brazilian surgeons, the ‘resection in bird cage’ technique has never been widely studied in terms of patient survival. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the postoperative consequences and overall survival of extra-musculoperiosteal resection compared with en-bloc resection in NSCLC patients with invasion of the endothoracic fascia.MethodsBetween January 1990 and December 2009, 33 NSCLC patients with invasion of the thoracic wall who underwent pulmonary resection were retrospectively analyzed. Of the 33 patients evaluated, 20 patients underwent en-bloc resection and 13 underwent ‘resection in bird cage.’ For each patient, a retrospective case note review was made.ResultsThe median age at surgery, gender, indication, rate of comorbidities, tumor size and the degree of uptake in the costal margin were similar for both groups. The rate of postoperative complications and the duration of hospitalization did not differ between the groups. Regarding the outcome variables, the disease-free interval, rate of local recurrence, metastasis-free time after surgery, overall mortality rate, mortality rate related to metastatic disease, duration following surgery in which deaths occurred, and overall survival were also similar between groups. The cumulative survival curves between the ‘resection in bird cage’ and en-bloc resection and between stages Ia + Ib and IIb + IIIa + IV were not significantly different (p = 0.68 and p = 0.64, respectively). The cumulative metastasis-free survival curves were not significantly different between the two types of surgery (p = 0.38).ConclusionsIn NSCLC patients with invasion of the endothoracic fascia, ‘resection in bird cage’ is a less aggressive procedure that yields similar results in terms of morbidity and mortality compared with en-bloc resection. Thus, ‘resection in bird cage’ meets the oncologic principles of resection and does not adversely affect the patients in terms of cure.

Highlights

  • Invasion of the chest wall per se is not a contraindication for tumor resection in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), provided there is no mediastinal lymph node or vital structure involvement

  • Lung cancer can be classified in several ways, the most frequent of which divides the cancers into two major groups: nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC)

  • NSCLCs have a formal indication for surgical treatment, and the preoperative evaluation should be precise, seeking to recommend the best treatment approach because patient survival is closely linked to his/ her tumor stage [3,4]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Invasion of the chest wall per se is not a contraindication for tumor resection in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), provided there is no mediastinal lymph node or vital structure involvement. Widely known to Brazilian surgeons, the ‘resection in bird cage’ technique has never been widely studied in terms of patient survival. The objective of this study was to evaluate the postoperative consequences and overall survival of extra-musculoperiosteal resection compared with en-bloc resection in NSCLC patients with invasion of the endothoracic fascia. NSCLCs have a formal indication for surgical treatment, and the preoperative evaluation should be precise, seeking to recommend the best treatment approach because patient survival is closely linked to his/ her tumor stage [3,4]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.