Bilateral Lung Volume Reduction Surgery Research Articles

Bilateral lung volume reduction surgery outperforms the unilateral approach in functional improvement.

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is an established treatment approach for patients with severe pulmonary emphysema, enhancing lung function and quality of life in selected patients. Functional benefits and outcomes after uni- versus bilateral lung volume reduction remain a topic of debate. A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing LVRS from January 2018 to October 2022 was conducted. After encouraging initial results, the standard unilateral LVRS approach was switched to bilateral. The goal of this study was to assess the impact on functional outcomes at 3 and 6 months post-surgery compared to preoperative levels for the uni- versus the bilateral approach. A total of 83 patients were included (43 bilateral, 40 unilateral). Baseline demographic and functional parameters were comparable between groups. The most common complication was prolonged air leak in 19 patients (11 in the unilateral group, 8 in the bilateral group). Two patients died perioperatively (2.4%). Overall, LVRS improved forced expiratory volume in 1 s by 8.3% after 3 and 12.5% after 6 months postoperatively compared to baseline. Bilateral surgery presented significantly superior forced expiratory volume in 1 s improvement than unilateral approach at both 3 (29.2% versus 2.9%; P = 0.0010) and 6 months (21.5% versus 3%; P = 0.0310) postoperatively. Additionally, it reduced hyperinflation (residual volume) by 23.1% after 3 months and by 17.5% after 6 months, compared to reductions of 16% and 9.1% in the unilateral group. Bilateral approach resulted in better functional outcomes 3 and 6 months postoperatively compared to unilateral surgery.

Twenty four-month follow-up after bullectomy, unilateral and bilateral lung volume reduction surgery: a single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive cases

PurposeWhile pharmacologic therapy remains the cornerstone of lung emphysema treatment, surgery is an additional therapeutic option in selected patient groups with advanced emphysema. The aim of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is to improve lung function, exercise capacity, quality of life and survival. We sought to determine the therapeutic value of surgical resection in specific patients with lung emphysema.Patients and methodsA retrospective study was performed consisting of 58 patients with lung emphysema who underwent surgical intervention over a 10-year period and were followed for 2 years postoperatively. The clinical characteristics recorded were FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 s), the 6-min walk test (6-MWT), the Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), body mass index (BMI) and quality of life prior to and 6, 12 and 24 months after surgical intervention. Moreover, all peri- and post-operative complications were noted.ResultsOut of 58 emphysema patients (72% male, FEV1 (L) 2.21 ± 0.17, RV (L) 3.39 ± 0.55), 19 underwent surgical bullectomy, 31 unilateral LVRS and 8 sequential bilateral LVRS. Six months after surgery, there was a statistically significant improvement in FEV1, RV, TLC, 6-MWT and mMRC. Over a period of 12 to 24 months postoperatively, clinical benefit gradually declines most likely due to COPD progression but patients still experienced a significant improvement in FEV1. The most common postoperative complications were persistent air leakage (> 7 days), arrhythmia and subcutaneous emphysema in 60%, 51.6% and 22.4%, respectively. No deaths were observed after surgical intervention.ConclusionIn a selected patient population, surgery led to significant improvement of lung function parameters, exercise capacity and quality of life. Over a period of 12 to 24 months postoperatively, clinical benefit gradually decreased most likely due to COPD progression.

Lung volume reduction surgery is safe and leads to functional improvement in patients who fail or cannot undergo bronchoscopic lung volume reduction

BackgroundBronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) has supplanted surgery in the treatment of patients with advanced emphysema, but not all patients qualify for it. Our study aimed to investigate the outcomes of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) among patients who either failed BLVR or were not candidates for it. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LVRS for upper lobe–predominant emphysema at a single tertiary center between March 2018 and December 2022. The main outcomes measures were preoperative and postoperative respiratory parameters, perioperative morbidity, and mortality. ResultsA total of 67 LVRS recipients were evaluated, including 10 who had failed prior valve placement. The median patient age was 69 years, and 35 (52%) were male. All procedures were performed thoracoscopically, with 36 patients (53.7%) undergoing bilateral LVRS. The median hospital length of stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 6-11 days). Prolonged air leak (>7 days) occurred in 20 patients. There was one 90-day mortality from a nosocomial pneumonia (non–COVID-related) and no further deaths at 12 months. There were mean improvements of 10.07% in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and 4.74% in diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, along with a mean decrease 49.2% in residual volume (P < .001 for all). The modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale was improved by 1.84 points (P < .001). ConclusionsLVRS can be performed safely in patients who are not candidates for BLVR and those who fail BLVR and leads to significant functional improvement. Long-term follow-up is necessary to ensure the sustainability of LVRS benefits in this patient population.

Relevance of pleural adhesions for short- and long-term outcomes after lung volume reduction surgery

ObjectivePleural adhesions (PLAs) have been shown to be a possible risk factor for air leak after lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), but the relevance of PLA for lung function outcome remains unclear. We analyzed our LVRS cohort for the influence of PLA on short-term (ie, prolonged air leak) and long-term outcomes. MethodsRetrospective observational cohort study with 187 consecutive patients who underwent LVRS from January 2016 to December 2019. PLA were defined as relevant if they were distributed extensively at the dorsal pleura; were present in at least at 2 areas, including the dorsal pleura; or present extensively at the mediastinal pleura. In patients with bilateral emphysema, bilateral LVRS was performed preferentially. The objectives were to quantify the association of PLA and rate of prolonged air leak (chest tube >7 days), and the association of PLA with postoperative exacerbations and with forced expiratory volume in 1 second 3 months postoperatively. The associations were quantified with odds ratios for binary outcomes, and with between-group differences for continuous outcomes. To account for missing observations, 100-fold multiple imputation was used. ResultsPLAs were found in 46 of 187 patients (24.6%). There was a 32.6% rate of prolonged air leak (n = 61), mean chest tube time was 7.84 days. A total of 94 (50.3%) LVRSs were unilateral and 93 were bilateral. There was evidence for an association between PLA and the rate of prolonged air leak (odds ratio, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.36 to 5.89; P = .006). There was no evidence for an association between PLA and postoperative exacerbations (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.5 to 2.45; P = .79). There was no evidence for an association between PLA and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (estimate −1.52; 95% CI –5.67 to 2.63; P = .47). Both unilateral and bilateral LVRS showed significant postoperative improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second by 27% (8.43 units; 95% CI, 3.66-13.12; P = .0006) and by 28% (7.87 units; 95% CI, 4.68-11.06; P < .0001) and a reduction in residual volume of 15% (−33.9 units; 95% CI, −56.37 to −11.42; P = .003) and 15% (−34.9 units; 95% CI, −52.57 to −17.22; P = .0001), respectively. ConclusionsPatients should be aware of potential prolongation of hospitalization due to PLA. However, there might be no relevant influence of PLA on lung function outcomes.

Lung Volume Reduction in Patients with Severe Emphysema: Bronchoscopic Lobar versus Surgical Tailored Treatment

Abstract Background Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) with valves excludes one whole lobe while lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) allows tailored treatment by resection of only heterogeneous, hardly perfused target areas. Aims We hypothesize that by (bilateral) LVRS, more areas of low attenuation (LAA, ≤ - 950 houndsfield units) can be resected more precisely, thus generating more functional improvement than BLVR. Methods Empysema patients treated with BLVR and LVRS at our institution between August 2019 and October 2020 were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. LVRS responders were defined as patients with a postoperative improvement of at least 10% in FEV1 in combination with 10% delta in 6-minute-walking-distance (6MWD) or residual volume (RV) or diffusion capacity (DLCO), within the BLVR group additionally with a chest CT scan proven target lobe atelectasis. We performed LAA measurement in preoperative CT scan and 3 months (LVRS) or 1 month (BLVR) postoperatively. Functional improvement as well as LAA reduction was measured in each group and the groups compared with each other. Results 29 patients underwent LVRS, 19 were responders (5 bilateral LVRS, 14 unilateral), 3 were lost for follow up. Within the BLVR group (n=29), 18 were responders. In bilateral LVRS, improvement of 6MWD and FEV1 was significantly higher than in BLVR, accompanied by a significantly higher LAA-reduction (22.18 vs 9.54, p=0.009). In unilateral LVRS, LAA-reduction was not significantly higher (12.06 vs 9.54, p=0.267), while 6MWD and FEV1 still showed a higher postoperative improvement. RV reduction and DLCO improvement did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusions LVRS might lead to significantly more functional improvement than BLVR with valves, maybe due to more resected LAA, especially in bilateral surgery. This concept may justify favoring primary bilateral LVRS over BLVR with valves in bilateral heterogeneous emphysema.

Identification of target zones for lung volume reduction surgery using three-dimensional computed tomography rendering.

BackgroundThe key issues for performing lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is the identification of the target zones. Recently introduced three-dimensional computed tomography rendering methods are used to identify the morphological distribution and its severity of lung emphysema by densitometry. We demonstrate a new software for emphysema imaging and show the pre- and post-operative results in patients undergoing LVRS planned based on this new technology.MethodsA real-time three-dimensional image analysis software system was used pre- and 3 months post-operatively in five patients with heterogeneous emphysema and a single patient with homogeneous morphology scheduled for LVRS. Focus was on low attenuation areas with <950 HU, distribution on both lungs and the value of the three-dimensional images for planning surgery. Functional outcome was assessed by pulmonary function tests after 3 months.ResultsFive patients underwent bilateral LVRS and one patient had unilateral LVRS. All patients showed a median increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 70% (range 30–120%), compared with baseline values. Hyperinflation (expressed as residual volume/total lung capacity ratio) was reduced by 30% (range 5–32%). In the patients with heterogeneous emphysema, the pre- and post-operative computed tomography scans and the densitometries showed a decrease in low attenuation areas by 23% (right side) and by 17% (left side), respectively.ConclusionWe demonstrate three-dimensional computed tomography-rendered images for planning personalised remodelling of hyperinflated lungs using LVRS. This user-friendly software has the potential to assist surgeons and interventional pulmonologists to select patients and to visualise target areas in LVRS procedures.

Staged unilateral lung volume reduction surgery: from mini-invasive to minimalist treatment strategies.

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) entailing unilateral or bilateral non-anatomical resection of severely damaged emphysematous tissue carried out by thoracoscopic or open surgical approaches, under general anesthesia with single-lung ventilation, has resulted in significant and long-lasting clinical and functional benefit. Unfortunately, the morbidity rates reported by simultaneous bilateral resectional LVRS has led to raise criticism regarding its cost-effectiveness and has stimulated in recent years the development of less invasive bronchoscopic and surgical non-resectional methods of treatment that are preferentially performed in a staged unilateral fashion. We had previously proposed an innovative LVRS modality, which did not entail any resection of lung tissue and was electively carried out according to a staged unilateral strategy by a multiport thoracoscopic access, through thoracic epidural anesthesia in conscious, spontaneously ventilating patients (awake LVRS). The awake LVRS resulted in significant clinical benefit paralleling that achieved by the resectional method with lower morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay. Moreover, the awake LVRS proved also suitable to be employed in stringently selected patients to perform redo procedures following previous successful bilateral LVRS. More recently, in order to minimize the global surgery- and anesthesia-related traumas, we have modified our original non-resectional method by adopting a single thoracoscopic access as well as an anesthesia protocol entailing use of a simple intercostal block with target control sedation, to realize an ultra-minimally invasive or minimalist LVRS. Hence, a deeper investigation of the pros and cons of staged unilateral LVRS strategies as well as of the novel surgical non-resectional and redo LVRS is warranted in order to verify, the optimal strategies of treatment, which will prove to reduce the typical LVRS-related morbidity while assuring the most durable benefit in patients with advanced emphysema.

Nonintubated Subxiphoid Bilateral Redo Lung Volume Reduction Surgery

This report describes a nonintubated, bilateral thoracoscopic redo lung volume reduction surgery procedure through a single subxiphoid access in a patient who previously underwent one-stage bilateral volume reduction for upper lobe-predominant heterogeneous emphysema 19 years earlier. The patient was uneventfully discharged on postoperative day 2, and meaningful improvement in respiratory function and exercise tolerance occurred at 3 months postoperatively. This novel surgical approach may merge the potential benefits of a subxiphoid incision for bilateral treatment, nonintercostal passage of chest drains, and adoption of a nonintubated anesthesia protocol.

Staged bilateral single-port thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery: A report of 11 cases.

The aim of the present study was to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of staged bilateral single-port thoracoscopic lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary emphysema (COPE). Eleven male patients with a mean age of 60.27±12.11 years with bilateral COPE and bullae were admitted to the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Xuzhou Central Hospital from January 2013 to June 2014. The patients underwent staged bilateral single-port thoracoscopic LVRS. The hyperinflated bullae were resected using endoscopic staplers (Endo-GIA), followed by continuous suture and biological glue for reinforcement of the margin. In addition, pulmonary function, blood gas assay, 6-min walk distance (6MWD) and life quality evaluated by a short form 36-item health survey questionnaire (SF-36) were recorded before and after LVRS, respectively. All the patients survived after surgery. The chest tube drainage time was 9.09±1.31 days and postoperative hospital stay was 15.73±2.75 days, with 5 cases of persistent air leakage and 7 cases of pulmonary infection which were finally cured. The patients were followed up for 3 to 12 months, and the pulmonary function, partial pressure of oxygen (pO2), 6MWD and life quality after unilateral or bilateral LVRS were improved compared to these parameters before surgery. However, there was no significant difference between unilateral and bilateral LVRS in terms of life quality. In conclusion, staged bilateral single-port thoracoscopic LVRS may improve the short-term life quality of patients with COPE.

Invited Commentary

Invited Commentary

The safety, efficacy, and durability of lung-volume reduction surgery: A 10-year experience

ObjectivesThe National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) validated the efficacy of lung-volume reduction surgery (LVRS) in selected patients with emphysema; however, concerns about the safety and durability of the operation have limited its clinical application. We evaluated our experience with LVRS, for the time period since approval was given by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, with respect to surgical morbidity and mortality, early and late functional outcomes, and long-term survival. MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed on 91 patients for whom consent was obtained for bilateral LVRS at our institution between January 2004 and June 2014. Primary outcomes analyzed were 6-month surgical mortality and overall survival at 1, 2, and 5 years. Secondary outcomes (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], residual volume, carbon monoxide diffusing capacity, a 6-minute walk test, exercise capacity, and a shortness-of-breath questionnaire) were analyzed for mean change from baseline at 1, 2, and 5 years after LVRS. ResultsThe 6-month surgical mortality rate was 0%. At the 1- and 5-year follow-up, 69% and 36% of the patients had an improvement in FEV1. The 1-, 2-, and 5-year FEV1 change in % predicted of the FEV1, compared with baseline after LVRS, respectively, was 11.1% (95% CI: 8.6%, 13.6%); 8.7% (95% CI: 6.1%, 11.4%); and 11.1% (95% CI: 7.1%, 15.0%); and the maximal workload (in watts [W]) had an average increase of: 10.7 W (95% CI: 6.9, 14.6); 7.6 W (95% CI: 2.8, 12.4); and 10.24 W (95% CI: 4.4, 16.1). Overall survival (95% CI) for the group was: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.00) at 1 year; 0.97 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.00) at 2 years; and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.67, 0.89) at 5 years. ConclusionsGiven proper patient selection, LVRS is a safe operation. Early functional measurements are consistent with significant clinical benefit. Long-term results demonstrate that improvements can be durable. Surgical LVRS continues to represent the standard for lung-volume reduction therapy.

Repeated lung volume reduction surgery is successful in selected patients.

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) improves dyspnoea, quality of life and may even prolong survival in carefully selected patients with end-stage emphysema. The benefit may be sustained for several years and vanishes with the natural progression of the disease. Data on repeated surgical treatment of emphysema are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, effects and outcomes of repeated LVRS (Re-LVRS) in patients no longer benefiting from their initial LVRS. Between June 2002 and December 2013, 22 patients (9 females) with advanced emphysema underwent Re-LVRS at a median of 60 months (25-196) after their initial LVRS. While initial LVRS was performed thoracoscopically as a bilateral procedure, Re-LVRS was performed unilaterally by a video-assisted thoracoscopic technique in 19 patients and, due to adhesions, by thoracotomy in 3 patients. Pulmonary function test (PFT) was performed at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Lung function at Re-LVRS was similar to that prior to the first LVRS. The 90-day mortality rate was 0%. The first patient died 15 months postoperatively. The median hospitalization time after Re-LVRS was significantly longer compared with the initial LVRS [14 days, interquartile range (IQR): 11-19, vs 9 days, IQR: 8-14; P = 0.017]. The most frequent complication was prolonged air leak with a median drainage time of 11 days (IQR: 6-13); reoperations due to persistent air leak were necessary in 7 patients (32%). Five patients (23%) had no complications. Lung function and Medical Research Council (MRC) score improved significantly for up to 12 months after Re-LVRS, with results similar to those after initial bilateral LVRS. The average increase in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) was 25% (a 7% increase over the predicted value or 0.18 l) at 3 months, and the mean reduction in hyperinflation, assessed by relative decrease in RV/TLC (residual volume/total lung capacity), was 12% at 3 months (a decrease of 8% in absolute ratios). The mean MRC breathlessness score decreased significantly after 3 months (from 3.7 to 2.2). Re-LVRS can be performed successfully in carefully selected patients as a palliative treatment. It may be performed as a bridge to transplantation or in patients with newly diagnosed intrapulmonary nodules or during elective cardiac surgery. Morbidity is acceptable and outcomes may be satisfactory with significantly improved lung function and reduced dyspnoea for at least 12 months postoperatively.

Árangur lungnasmækkunaraðgerða við langvinnri lungnaþembu á Íslandi

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) can benefit patients with severe emphysema. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of LVRS performed in Iceland. A prospective study of 16 consecutive patients who underwent bilateral LVRS through median sternotomy between January 1996 and December 2008. All patients had disabling dyspnea, lung hyperinflation, and emphysema with upper lobe predominance. Preoperatively all patients underwent pulmonary rehabilitation. Spirometry, lung volumes, arterial blood gases and exercise capacity were measured before and after surgery. Mean follow-up time was 8.7 years. Mean age was 59.2 ± 5.9 years. All patients had a history of heavy smoking. There was no perioperative mortality and survival was 100%, 93%, and 63% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. The forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and the forced vital capacity (FVC) improved significantly after surgery by 35% (p<0.001) and 14% (p<0.05), respectively. The total lung capacity, residual volume and partial pressure of CO2 also showed statistically significant improvements but exercise capacity, O2 consumption and diffusing capacity of the lung for CO did not change. Prolonged air leak (≥ 7 days) was the most common complication (n=7). Five patients required reoperation, most commonly for sternal dehiscence (n=4). In this small prospective study, FEV1 and FVC increased and lung volumes and PaCO2 improved after LVRS. Long term survival was satisfactory although complications such as reoperations for sternal dehiscence were common and hospital stay therefore often prolonged.

The National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT)

The National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) was a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial that compared optimal medical treatment, including pulmonary rehabilitation, with optimal medical treatment plus lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). It was the largest and most complete collection of patient demographic, clinical, physiological, and radiographic data ever compiled in severe emphysema. NETT investigated the effects of optimal medical management and LVRS on short- and long-term survival, as well as lung function, exercise performance, and quality of life. NETT also provided much information regarding the evaluation and prognosis of severe emphysema; specifically the important negative influences that hyperinflation and small airway disease have on survival. NETT emphasized the importance of addressing nonpulmonary issues such as nutrition, cardiac disease, anxiety, and depression in emphysema. NETT demonstrated that physiological, genomic, and radiographic phenotype can predict patient survival as well as response to treatment. Because the major purpose of NETT was to compare bilateral LVRS with optimal medical treatment in emphysema, patients enrolled into NETT were comprehensively characterized and selected to have a specific window of airflow obstruction and hyperinflation and to lack significant comorbidities. The NETT patient population’s restrictive features offer distinct advantages (well-characterized predominant emphysematous phenotype) and disadvantages (lack of comorbidities and significant chronic bronchitis) that must be considered when interpreting the implications of these results. Herein, we provide a summary of the major NETT findings that provide insight into the evaluation and medical treatment of emphysema.

Five year after bilateral lung volume reduction surgery: a case report

Five year after bilateral lung volume reduction surgery: a case report

Lung Volume Reduction Surgery Using the NETT Selection Criteria

The National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) proved that lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) was safe and effective in patients with certain clinical characteristics and using defined inclusion-exclusion criteria. Based on the selection criteria developed in that trial, we performed bilateral LVRS on 49 patients during the period of February 2004 until May 2009. Forty-nine patients underwent lung volume reduction by either median sternotomy (10) or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (39) selected according to NETT described parameters. Preoperative characteristics were the following: mean (±SD) age 62.5±6.6 years, preoperative FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration) 691 cc (±159), % of predicted FEV1 25.3 (±6.2), preoperative Dlco (diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide) 7.6 (±2.7), and % of predicted DLCO 27% (±7.3). All patients had upper lobe predominant disease and either low exercise capacity (n=23) or high exercise capacity (n=26) as defined by the NETT. There was no operative or 90-day mortality. Median length of stay was 8 days (interquartile range=6 to 10). Two patients required reintubation and tracheostomy but were decannulated prior to discharge. The BODE index (body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity), a multidimensional predictor of survival in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, improved -2.3 (±1.5, p<0.0001) (missing data: 5 of 42, 11.9%) and the FEV1 improved 286 cc (±221, p<0.0001), both 1 year after surgery. Probability of survival was 0.98 (95% CI [confidence interval]=0.94 to 1) at 1 year, and 0.95 (95% CI=0.88 to 1) at 3 years. Surgical lung volume reduction for emphysema can be performed in patients using selection criteria developed by the NETT with very low surgical risk and excellent midterm results. Surgical LVRS is the standard against which other nonsurgical treatments for advanced emphysema should be judged.

P141 Lung Volume reduction surgery--the first 200 operations in a UK centre: the benefits of a multidisciplinary strategy and minimally invasive approach

<h3>Objective</h3> Despite the supportive results of the randomised, controlled NETT trial, lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is still infrequently performed in the United Kingdom. We however, have persisted with video assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) LVRS and report the results of our first 200 operations. <h3>Patients/methods</h3> Surgical candidates for LVRS were selected by a multidisciplinary team approach using radionuclide scintigraphy in all cases. After the initial 20 open cases we adopted policy of two stage bilateral VATS LVRS with the timing of the second operation determined by the patient. 160 patients have completed one-stage LVRS: median age 60 (39–73) years and 20 patients have completed two-stage bilateral LVRS: median age 59 (41–66) years. Data from a prospective database were analysed to assess the postoperative changes in pulmonary function and health status (SF 36 questionnaire) recorded at three, six and, twelve months and thence annually. <h3>Results</h3> 30-day mortality was 6% and 25% required post-operative ventilation (9 of 50 for &lt;24 h). Hospital stay was 14 (2–110) days. FEV₁ in both groups showed significant continuous improved at the 3-month, 6-month and 1-year postoperative review (p≤0.035). Furthermore, significant improvements (p≤0.05) in SF 36 were seen across the seven domains assessed: Physical Functioning (up to 1 year), Social Functioning (up to 1 year), Role-Physical (up to 1 year), Role-Emotional (at 5 years), Mental Health (up to 1 year), Energy/Vitality (up to 1 year), and General Health (up to 1 year). There has however been a significant reduction in the domain of Bodily Pain up to 4 years post LVRS (p≤0.05). More lasting improvements are seen in two-stage bilateral group compared to the one-stage group. <h3>Conclusion</h3> The use of a multidisciplinary team approach and a prolonged surgical strategy can achieve durable postoperative benefits from LVRS for up to 4 years with acceptable risk.

National Emphysema Treatment Trial redux: Accentuating the positive

Under the Freedom of Information Act, we obtained the follow-up data of the National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) to determine the long-term outcome for "a heterogeneous distribution of emphysema with upper lobe predominance," postulated by the NETT hypothesis to be optimal candidates for lung volume reduction surgery. Using the NETT database, we identified patients with heterogeneous distribution of emphysema with upper lobe predominance and analyzed for the first time follow-up data for those receiving lung volume reduction surgery and those receiving medical management. Furthermore, we compared the results of the NETT reduction surgery group with a previously reported consecutive case series of 250 patients undergoing bilateral lung volume reduction surgery using similar selection criteria. Of the 1218 patients enrolled, 511 (42%) conformed to the NETT hypothesis selection criteria and received the randomly assigned surgical or medical treatment (surgical = 261; medical = 250). Lung volume reduction surgery resulted in a 5-year survival benefit (70% vs 60%; P = .02). Results at 3 years compared with baseline data favored surgical reduction in terms of residual volume reduction (25% vs 2%; P < .001), University of California San Diego dyspnea score (16 vs 0 points; P < .001), and improved St George Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score (12 points vs 0 points; P < .001). For the 513 patients with a homogeneous pattern of emphysema randomized to surgical or medical treatment, lung volume reduction surgery produced no survival advantage and very limited functional benefit. Patients most likely to benefit from lung volume reduction surgery have heterogeneously distributed emphysema involving the upper lung zones predominantly. Such patients in the NETT trial had results nearly identical to those previously reported in a nonrandomized series of similar patients undergoing lung volume reduction surgery.

Early Outcomes after Bilateral Thoracoscopy versus Median Sternotomy for Lung Volume Reduction

: A National Emphysema Treatment Trial subanalysis, although finally describing outcomes as "comparable," suggested that bilateral lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) may be slightly less morbid than by median sternotomy (MS). We report a single surgeon experience using both the MS and VATS approaches to provide additional information on this issue in a setting of uniform patient selection and perioperative management. Our hypothesis was that a VATS approach would provide equivalent or less morbidity than MS despite being applied to a group of patients subjectively selected to be higher risk than those undergoing MS. : Consecutive patients over a 9-year period underwent LVRS by one surgeon by either MS or VATS in a nonrandomized fashion. Thoracoscopy was selected over MS primarily when the surgeon estimated a greater overall risk profile and thus a greater chance of morbidity/mortality in a particular patient. : There were 15 patients in the VATS group and 35 in the MS group. In terms of measures of risk profile, there were no differences between the groups that met statistical significance, but several values trended toward higher risk within the VATS group (eg, age, 63 VATS vs. 59 MS, P = 0.08; moderate pulmonary hypertension, 38% VATS vs. 14% MS, P = 0.11; and residual volume, 241% VATS vs. 226% MS, P = 0.32). With regard to outcomes, operative time was significantly longer in the VATS group (VATS = 155 minutes vs. MS=129 minutes, P = 0.01). All other outcomes, including the incidence of major complications (13.3% VATS vs. 17.1% MS, P = 0.39), were similar between the groups. There was a single death within 90 days (1.9% of entire series; 2.9% of MS group). : In this series, although patients undergoing LVRS by VATS tended to have a higher risk profile, their outcomes were no worse than in those undergoing LVRS by MS. This suggests that the VATS approach to bilateral LVRS may incur slightly less morbidity and thus may be the best option in the most compromised patients who is nonetheless felt will benefit from LVRS.

Staged bilateral lung volume reduction surgery — the benefits of a patient-led strategy☆

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is conventionally a one-staged bilateral operation. We hypothesised that a more conservative staged bilateral approach determined by the patient not the surgeon would reduce operative risk and prolong the overall benefit. In a population of 114 consecutive patients who were identified as suitable for bilateral LVRS an initial cohort of 26 patients (15 male; 11 female, median age: 58 years) underwent one-staged bilateral surgery: 18 by median sternotomy and eight by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) (group OB). A subsequent cohort of 88 patients had unilateral VATS LVRS with the contralateral operation not scheduled until the patient requested this. Longitudinal follow-up included analysis of lung function, health status (SF 36) and survival. At a median follow-up of 2.8 (range: 0-9.9) years, staged bilateral LVRS was performed in 16 patients (10 male; 6 female, median age: 59 years) (group SB) at a median interval of 3.9 (range: 0.7-5.9) years after the first operation. Unilateral LVRS has been performed in 73 patients (43 male; 30 female, median age: 60 years) (group U). There were significant improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) for 6 months in groups OB and U; in group SB there was a second improvement at 4 years (p<0.05). There were significant reductions in residual volume (RV) and total lung capacity (TLC) in groups OB and U for 2 years; in group SB there was a further significant reduction lasting up to 6 years in TLC (p<0.05) and RV (p<0.01). There were significant improvements in health status lasting up to 1 year in groups OB and U. However, in group SB these improvements lasted for 4 years in the domain of physical functioning and 6 years in the domains of social functioning and energy/vitality. There was no significant difference (p=0.07) in 30-day mortality among groups OB (7.7%), SB (13%) and U (4.1%). Similarly, there was no difference between groups OB and SB/U in 3-year survival (81% vs 77%) or 5-year survival (54% vs 66%). A staged bilateral approach to LVRS dictated by patients' perception of their condition appears to lead to a more prolonged overall benefit than one-staged LVRS without compromising survival.