Lung Volume Reduction Surgery Research Articles

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 feasible after initial endobronchial valve treatment for emphysema patients.

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction with endobronchial valves is a guideline treatment leading to improved pulmonary function, exercise tolerance, and quality of life, in patients with advanced emphysema, severe hyperinflation and no collateral ventilation. After valve-treatment, loss of the initial lung volume reduction effect can occur, as well as local valve-induced complications such as persistent hemoptysis. In these cases, a surgical lobectomy can be considered to achieve similar efficacy outcomes. We evaluated the safety and feasibility of a video assisted thoracoscopic surgery -lobectomy after valve-treatment. This single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent an elective lobectomy after previous valve-treatment. Data was evaluated for safety and efficacy for the additional surgical procedure. Twenty one patients (73% female, median age 67 (7) years, FEV1 29 (7) %pred, and residual volume 223 (58) %pred) were included. There was no 90 days mortality, and no post-operative Intensive Care admissions. Pulmonary infections (14%) and prolonged air leak (14%) were the most common complications. In patients who underwent surgery due to loss or lack of effect of valve-treatment, a lobectomy led to a significant improvement in pulmonary function; median FEV1 +75 (193)ml (p < 0.013), Forced Vital Capacity +450 (572) ml (p 0.001), Residual Volume -665 (715) ml (p 0.005). In patients who underwent a lobectomy because of complications of valve-treatment, all complications were resolved after surgery. We demonstrate that an elective lobectomy after an initial valve-treatment is safe, feasible, and restores the lung volume reduction effect.

Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction as the Treatment of Choice versus Robotic-Assisted Lung Volume Reduction Surgery in Similar Patients with Emphysema - An Initial Experience of the Benefits and Complications.

There is an assumption that because EBLVR requires less use of hospital resources, offsetting the higher cost of endobronchial valves, it should therefore be the treatment of choice wherever possible. We have tested this hypothesis in a retrospective analysis of the two in similar groups of patients. In a 4-year experience, we performed 177 consecutive LVR procedures: 83 patients underwent Robot Assisted Thoracoscopic (RATS) LVRS and 94 EBLVR. EBLVR was intentionally precluded by evidence of incomplete fissure integrity or intra-operative assessment of collateral ventilation. Unilateral RATS LVRS was performed in these cases together with those with unsuitable targets for EBLVR. EBLVR was uncomplicated in 37 (39%) cases; complicated by post-procedure spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) in 28(30%) and required revision in 29 (31%). In the LVRS group, 7 (8%) patients were readmitted with treatment-related complications, but no revisional procedure was needed. When compared with uncomplicated EBLVR, LVRS had a significantly longer operating time: 85 (14-82) vs 40 (15-151) minutes (p<0.001) and hospital stay: 7.5 (2-80) vs 2 (1-14) days (p<0.01). However, LVRS had a similar total operating time to both EBLVR requiring revision: 78 (38-292) minutes and hospital stay to EBLVR complicated by pneumothorax of 11.5 (6.5-24.25) days. Use of critical care was significantly longer in RATS group, and it was also significantly longer in EBV with SP group than in uncomplicated EBV group. Endobronchial LVR does use less hospital resources than RATS LVRS in comparable groups if the recovery is uncomplicated. However, this advantage is lost if one includes the resources needed for the treatment of complications and revisional procedures. Any decision to favour EBLVR over LVRS should not be based on the assumption of a smoother, faster perioperative course.

Management of Refractory Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Review

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common condition with an estimated prevalence of 12% in adults over the age of 30 years worldwide. COPD is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with a substantial economic and social burden. There are an estimated 3 million deaths annually due to COPD. However, most of the patients with COPD respond to routine interventions like bronchodilator therapy, assessing supplemental oxygen needs, smoking cessation, vaccinations, and pulmonary rehabilitation. There is a significant number of patients who unfortunately progress to have persistent symptoms despite these interventions. Refractory COPD is not yet formally defined. Patients with severe persistent symptoms or exacerbations despite appropriate care can be considered to have refractory COPD. Managing refractory COPD needs a multidimensional approach. In this review article, we will discuss essential interventions like ensuring adequate inhaler techniques, exploring the need for non-invasive ventilatory support, use of chronic antibiotics and phosphodiesterase inhibitors to advanced therapies like bronchoscopic lung volume reduction surgery, and the upcoming role of anti-IL5 agents in managing patients with refractory COPD. We will also discuss non-pharmacologic interventions like psycho-social support and nutritional support. We will conclude by discussing the palliative care aspect of managing patients with refractory COPD. Through this review article, we aim to better the approach to managing patients with refractory COPD and discuss new upcoming therapies.

Safety of Home Discharge With a Chest Tube After Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Complicated by Persistent Airleak.

The incidence of pneumothorax after bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) using Zephyr (Pulmonx Corporation) endobronchial valves is ~26%. Many patients who develop a postprocedural pneumothorax require chest tube placement. If a persistent airleak is present, patients tolerating waterseal can be discharged home with a mini-atrium with a low risk of empyema. Data were collected on patients from the Epic (Epic System Corporation) electronic medical record between July 2019 and November 2022. Our retrospective study reviewed a total of 102 BLVR procedures. Twenty-six of these procedures were complicated by a pneumothorax post-BLVR (25%). After 24 procedures, patients were discharged home with a chest tube after a persistent airleak. The primary endpoint of the study was the incidence of intrapleural infection in this population. The secondary endpoint was the average length of time the chest tube was in place until outpatient removal. Out of the 24 discharge events, 2 events (8.3%) were complicated by an intrapleural infection before chest tube removal. The average number of days requiring a chest tube until outpatient removal was 16.9 days, which is similar to the duration observed in patients discharged home with a chest tube after lung volume reduction surgery. Discharging patients home with a chest tube after BLVR therapy is safe and may reduce hospital length of stay. Our study shows the incidence of intrapleural infection after home discharge with a chest tube after BLVR is low.

First in Human Phase 1 Clinical Trial of Stereotactic Irradiation to Achieve Lung Volume Reduction (SILVR) in Severe Emphysema

PurposeOnly a subset of patients with severe emphysema qualify for lung volume reduction surgery or endobronchial valves. We previously demonstrated that Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) of lung tumors reduces lung volume in treated lobes by creating localized lung fibrosis. We aimed to determine the safety and, secondarily, explore the efficacy of Stereotactic Irradiation for Lung Volume Reduction (SILVR) over 18 months following intervention in patients with severe emphysema. Methods and materialsWe conducted a single-arm prospective clinical trial in eligible patients with severe emphysema treated with unilateral SABR (45 Gy in three fractions) to a target within the most emphysematous region. Primary outcome was safety i.e., incidence of grade≥3 adverse events. Secondary outcomes of efficacy were also explored. ResultsEight subjects received the intervention. Median (range) baseline characteristics were age 73 years (63-78), FEV1% 28.5% (19.0-42.0), DLCO% 40% (24.0-67.0), and BODE index 5.5 (5-9). The incidence of grade≥3 adverse events was 3/8 (37.5%). The relative Δtarget lobe volume was -23.1% (-1.6,-41.5) and -26.5% (-20.6,-40.8) at six and 18 months, respectively. Absolute ΔFEV1% was greater in subjects with BODE index ≤5 vs. ≥6 (+12.0% vs. -2.0%). The mean baseline lung density (in Hounsfield units, reflecting the amount of preserved parenchyma) within the intermediate dose volume (V60BED3) correlated with the absolute Δtarget lobe volume at 18 months. ConclusionsStereotactic Irradiation for Lung Volume Reduction appears to be safe, with a signal for efficacy as a novel therapeutic alternative for patients with severe emphysema. SILVR may be most safe/effective in patients with lower BODE index and/or less parenchymal destruction.

Endobronchial coil lung volume reduction performed on patients with emphysema dominant COPD: Long term follow-up results.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a commonly seen, preventable, and treatable disease with permanent respiratory symptoms and air entrapment that is caused by particle exposure. In case of limited response to traditional treatment protocols, lung volume reduction may be performed in patients with emphysema dominant patterns. In this study, long term follow-up results of the patients who had been operated on by minimal invasive bronchoscopic lung volume reduction surgery by coil placement were reported. Records of the patients operated on by coil placement were retrospectively investigated, and pulmonary function test (PFT), echocardiography (ECHO), six-minute walking test (6MWT), tomography images, ventilation scintigraphy, and clinical summaries were evaluated. Out of 34 initial candidates, 18 patients were included in the study. Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Spearman's rho were utilized to compare interventions and follow-up testing. The average age of 18 patients was 62 (50-74) years, and except for one patient, all were males (n= 17). Fifteen patients were operated bilaterally, and the rest were unilaterally operated, with an average of 10 coils placed per coil placement. An average of 90 days was between bronchoscopic coil placement, with a follow-up duration of 45 days in between. Mean total follow-up duration was 794 (± 424) days. Pneumonia and pneumonitis were seen in 33% of patients within the first month. Mortality from respiratory causes was found to be 11%, while mortality from all causes was found to be 22%. Statistical difference was observed regarding 6MWT after bronchoscopic volume reduction when compared the initial preoperative values. However, this difference was later lost statistically at the second follow-up performed after the completion of both sides. A benefit in improved resting saturation was observed after the second procedure, which was not evident after unilateral intervention. However, similiar to 6MWT, this benefit was lost at the second follow-up, with resting saturation instead being effected negatively. No difference was observed in PFT results; however, a correlation was seen between FEV1 and walking distance. No specific correlation had been seen in the ECHO evaluation. Benefits regarding 6MWT and resting saturation were observed in patients undergoing minimal invasive bronchoscopic lung volume reduction surgery with coils. This benefit was evident in the short term but was lost as the follow-up duration increased. A relatively high morbidity and mortality rate was also present, further stating the risky nature of pulmonary intervention, even minimally invasive procedures, on patients with COPD.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for lung volume reduction surgery: an observational cohort study.

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is an established therapeutic option for advanced emphysema. To improve patients' safety and reduce complications, an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) was implemented. This study aims to describe and evaluate the short-term outcome of this ERP. This retrospective single-centre study included all consecutive LVRS patients (1 January 2017 until 15 September 2020). An ERP for LVRS was implemented and stepwise optimised from 1 August 2019, it consisted of changes in pre-, peri- and postoperative care pathways. Patients were compared before and after implementation of ERP. Primary outcome was incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo), and secondary outcomes included chest tube duration, incidence of prolonged air leak (PAL), length of stay (LOS) and 90-day mortality. Lung function and exercise capacity were evaluated at 3 and 6 months post-LVRS. Seventy-six LVRS patients were included (pre-ERP: n=41, ERP: n=35). The ERP cohort presented with lower incidence of postoperative complications (42% vs 83%, P=0.0002), shorter chest tube duration (4 vs 12 days, P<0.0001) with a lower incidence of PAL (21% vs 61%, P=0.0005) and shorter LOS (6 vs 14 days, P<0.0001). No in-hospital mortality occurred in the ERP cohort versus 4 pre-ERP. Postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 s was higher in the ERP cohort compared to pre-ERP at 3 months (1.35 vs 1.02 l) and at 6 months (1.31 vs 1.01 l). Implementation of ERP as part of a comprehensive reconceptualisation towards LVRS, demonstrated fewer postoperative complications, including PAL, resulting in reduced LOS. Improved short-term functional outcomes were observed at 3 and 6 months.

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.

Endobronchial Valves for the Management of Severe Emphysema

What Is the Issue?&#x0D; &#x0D; People with severe emphysema who do not experience relief with non-invasive therapies such as medication, physical activity, and smoking cessation may need advanced treatments.&#x0D; Endobronchial valves are an alternative therapy that may improve exercise capacity and quality of life, and are less invasive compared to lung reduction surgery or transplants.&#x0D; &#x0D; What Did We Do?&#x0D; &#x0D; A 2019 CADTH report summarized clinical effectiveness evidence for valves compared to standard care. CADTH sought to update this evidence with new clinical research and include information on cost-effectiveness, which was not part of the previous report.&#x0D; A research information specialist conducted a literature search of the peer-reviewed and grey literature with a search strategy focused on emphysema and endobronchial valves. The search was limited to English-language documents published since 2018. One reviewer screened articles for inclusion based on predefined criteria, critically appraised the included studies, and narratively summarized the findings.&#x0D; &#x0D; What Did We Find?&#x0D; &#x0D; We did not find systematic reviews or health technology assessments published since 2018 that contained clinical evidence not already captured in the 2019 CADTH report. Two RCTs provide updated clinical evidence for endobronchial valves compared to standard care, and 1 RCT contains evidence on valves compared to lung surgery.&#x0D; The evidence suggests that valves may improve lung function, breathing ability, and physical activity in middle-aged and older adults with emphysema compared to standard care; the effect on quality of life and safety is unclear. The previous CADTH report showed lung function, breathing ability, physical activity, and quality of life were favourable for valve treatment compared to standard care.&#x0D; The previous CADTH report showed that valves resulted in harmful outcomes compared to standard care; however, in the current review, safety was difficult to assess due to poor reporting.&#x0D; When comparing valves to lung surgery, lung surgery may improve quality of life compared to valves; other outcomes did not favour one therapy over another.&#x0D; For cost-effectiveness, valves may be favourable compared to standard medical care, while their cost-effectiveness compared to lung volume reduction surgery is unclear.&#x0D; One study was conducted in Canada, and no studies were conducted in children and younger adults.&#x0D; &#x0D; What Does it Mean?&#x0D; &#x0D; Endobronchial valves are a potential therapy for people with severe emphysema with some favourable clinical and cost outcomes, but the evidence for their safety is unclear.&#x0D; Decision-makers may wish to consider the balance of favourable and harmful effects in existing evidence before more high-quality evidence in Canada, especially for safety, is available.&#x0D;

Predictors of reoperation after lung volume reduction surgery

ObjectivesLung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has proven an effective treatment for emphysema, by decreasing hyperinflation and improving lung function, activity level and reducing dyspnoea. However, postoperative air leak is an important complication, often leading to reoperation.Our aim was to analyse reoperations after LVRS and identify potential predictors.MethodsConsecutive single-centre unilateral VATS LVRS performed from 2017 to 2022 were included. Typically, 3–5 minor resections were made using vascular magazines without buttressing. Data were obtained from an institutional database and analysed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of reoperation. Number and location of injuries were registered.ResultsIn total, 191 patients were included, 25 were reoperated (13%). In 21 patients, the indication for reoperation was substantial air leak, 3 patients bleeding and 1 patient empyema. Length of stay (LOS) was 21 (11–33) vs. 5 days (3–11), respectively. Only 3 injuries were in the stapler line, 13 within < 2cm and 15 injuries were in another site. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that decreasing DLCO increased risk of reoperation, OR 1.1 (1.03, 1.18, P = 0.005). Resections in only one lobe, compared to resections in multiple lobes, were also a risk factor OR 3.10 (1.17, 9.32, P = 0.03). Patients undergoing reoperation had significantly increased 30-day mortality, OR 5.52 (1.03, 26.69, P = 0.02).ConclusionsOur incidence of reoperation after LVRS was 13% leading to prolonged LOS and increased 30-day mortality. Low DLCO and resections in a single lobe were significant predictors of reoperation. The air leak was usually not localized in the stapler line.Graphical abstractKey question: What characterizes reoperations after lung volume reduction surgeries?Key findings: Lung injuries were predominantly located away from the original surgical site.Take home message: Lung injuries remote from the stapler line is frequent during reoperation after lung volume reduction surgery.Location of lung injuries found during reoperation after lung volume reduction surgery

Lung Volume Reduction Surgery (Clinical Cases)

Emphysema is a chronic lung disease in which the walls of the alveoli in the lungs weaken and collapse; leaving abnormally large residual spaces filled with air even when the patient exhales. The most common symptoms of emphysema are shortness of breath (dyspnea); cough; fatigue; and weight loss. Emphysema often coexists with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The treatment of emphysema requires a multidisciplinary approach; including education; exercise; tobacco cessation; oral and inhaled medications; oxygen therapy; and lung transplantation. Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) may be an option for patients who experience shortness of breath and whose pulmonary function tests show severe obstruction and enlarged lungs. The surgery aims to remove the least functional part of the lung to improve airflow; diaphragm; and chest wall mechanics; as well as alveolar gas exchange in the remaining lung. Objective — to familiarize doctors with the clinic’s experience in reducing lung volume in patients with bullous emphysema. Materials and methods. Our clinic performed the following surgical interventions to reduce lung volume: VATS resection of large (giant) lung bullae — 14 (77.7 %) cases; VATS lo­­bec­tomy — 2 (11.1 %); lobectomy through thoracotomy — 1 (5.6 %); VATS sublobar resection — 1 (5.6 %). Results and discussion. There were no fatalities. The following postoperative complications were recorded: prolonged under-expansion of the operated lung in 5 (27.7 %) cases; empyema of the residual pleural cavity with bronchial fistula in 1 (5.6 %). The overall incidence of postoperative complications was 33.3 %. Two patients with prolonged underdistension of the operated lung required reoperation (VATS revision of the pleural cavity and redilation). The patient who developed pleural empyema with a bronchial fistula underwent bronchial blockage with a satisfactory result. In all cases of LVRS; a positive clinical effect was recorded in the first 3 months after surgery. During the follow-up period of up to 2 years; only 2 (11.1 %) patients showed no clinical effect and signs of progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory failure were observed. Conclusions. Lung volume reduction surgery is a method of treating bullous lung disease that allows achieving overall treatment effectiveness in the follow-up period of up to 3 months in 100 % of cases; and in the follow-up period of up to 2 years — in 89.9 %. The high rate of postoperative complications in LVRS requires a physician to carefully select patients for surgery and monitor their condition daily in the postoperative period.

Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbations in Hospitalized Patients From Admission to Discharge: A Comprehensive Review of Therapeutic Interventions.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and debilitating condition that often necessitates hospitalization for exacerbations. Since COPD exacerbations can cause significant morbidity and mortality, managing them is crucial for patient care. Effective management of COPD exacerbations is essential to prevent complications, as COPD exacerbations are associated with increased healthcare costs and decreased quality of life. This review aims to comprehensively discuss the management of COPD exacerbations, covering various pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic strategies. These include inhaled bronchodilators, systemic steroids, antibiotics, invasive and non-invasive ventilation, oxygen therapy, smoking cessation, immunization with pneumococcal vaccine, inhalers at discharge, pulmonary rehabilitation, long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT), ambulatory oxygen therapy, short-burst oxygen therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), endobronchial procedures, and lung transplant. It is drawn upon various sources, including clinical studies, systemic reviews, and observational studies, to provide a comprehensive overview of current practices and identify areas for future research and innovation in managing COPD exacerbations. Addressing these areas of interest can improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Lung volume reduction for emphysema using one-way endobronchial valves: An Australian cohort.

Emphysema can be associated with gas trapping and hyperinflation, which negatively impacts on quality of life, life expectancy, and functional capacity. Lung volume reduction (LVR) surgery can reduce gas trapping and improve mortality in select patients but carries a high risk of major complications. Bronchoscopic techniques for LVR using one-way endobronchial valves (EBV) have become an established efficacious alternative to surgery. A bi-center retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with severe emphysema who underwent endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) using Pulmonx Zephyr EBVs. Symptomatic patients with gas-trapping and hyperinflation on lung function testing were selected. Target-lobe selection was based on quantitative imaging analysis and ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy. Successful procedures were determined from clinical review, imaging and follow-up testing. Thirty-nine patients underwent ELVR. Mean pre-procedure forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 0.75 L, residual volume (RV) was 225% predicted and total lung capacity was 129% predicted. Most common treated-lobe was left upper lobe. Post-procedure pneumothorax occurred in 36.5% of patients with 73% requiring intercostal catheter insertion for drainage. Mean FEV1 improvement was +140 mL and 57% of patients achieved minimal clinical important difference FEV1 increase of ≥12%. Maximal mean RV change was -1010 mL with 69% of patients achieving minimal clinical important difference RV decrease of ≥350 mL. Clinician-determined success of ELVR was 78%. Procedure-related mortality was absent. LVR using EBVs is safe and can lead to significant improvements in lung function, particularly reduction of gas trapping and hyperinflation. Occurrence of pneumothorax post-procedure is a complication that must be monitored for and managed appropriately.

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.

Comparative outcomes of lung volume reduction surgery and lung transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lung volume reduction (LVR) and lung transplantation (LTx) have been used in different populations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. To date, comparative study of LVR and LTx has not been performed. We sought to address this gap by pooling the existing evidence in the literature. An electronic search was performed to identify all prospective studies on LVR and LTx published since 2000. Baseline characteristics, perioperative variables, and clinical outcomes were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis. The analysis included 65 prospective studies comprising 3,671 patients [LTx: 15 studies (n=1,445), LVR: 50 studies (n=2,226)]. Mean age was 60 [95% confidence interval (CI): 58-62] years and comparable between the two groups. Females were 51% (95% CI: 30-71%) in the LTx group vs. 28% (95% CI: 21-36%) in LVR group (P=0.05). Baseline 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and pulmonary function tests were comparable except for the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), which was lower in the LTx group [21.8% (95% CI: 16.8-26.7%) vs. 27.3% (95% CI: 25.5-29.2%), P=0.04]. Postoperatively, both groups experienced improved FEV1, however post-LTx FEV1 was significantly higher than post-LVR FEV1 [54.9% (95% CI: 41.4-68.4%) vs. 32.5% (95% CI: 30.1-34.8%), P<0.01]. 6MWT was also improved after both procedures [LTx: 212.9 (95% CI: 119.0-306.9) to 454.4 m (95% CI: 334.7-574.2), P<0.01; LVR: 286 (95% CI: 270.2-301.9) to 409.1 m (95% CI: 392.1-426.0), P<0.01], however, with no significant difference between the groups. Pooled survival over time showed no significant difference between the groups. LTx results in better FEV1 but otherwise has comparable outcomes to LVR.

Adjuvant Transthoracic Negative-Pressure Ventilation in Nonintubated Thoracoscopic Surgery.

To minimize the risks of barotrauma during nonintubated thoracoscopic-surgery under spontaneous ventilation, we investigated an adjuvant transthoracic negative-pressure ventilation (NPV) method in patients operated on due to severe emphysema or interstitial lung disease. In this retrospective study, NPV was employed for temporary low oxygen saturation and to achieve end-operative lung re-expansion during nonintubated lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for severe emphysema (30 patients, LVRS group) and in the nonintubated wedge resection of undetermined interstitial lung disease (30 patients, wedge-group). The results were compared following 1:1 propensity score matching with equivalent control groups undergoing the same procedures under spontaneous ventilation, with adjuvant positive-pressure ventilation (PPV) performed on-demand through the laryngeal mask. The primary outcomes were changes (preoperative-postoperative value) in the arterial oxygen tension/fraction of the inspired oxygen ratio (ΔPO2/FiO2;) and ΔPaCO2, and lung expansion completeness on a 24 h postoperative chest radiograph (CXR-score, 2: full or 1: incomplete). Intergroup comparisons (NPV vs. PPV) showed no differences in demographic and pulmonary function. NPV could be accomplished in all instances with no conversion to general anesthesia with intubation. In the LVRS group, NPV improved ΔPO2/FiO2 (9.3 ± 16 vs. 25.3 ± 30.5, p = 0.027) and ΔPaCO2 (-2.2 ± 3.15 mmHg vs. 0.03 ± 0.18 mmHg, p = 0.008) with no difference in the CXR score, whereas in the wedge group, both ΔPO2/FiO2 (3.1 ± 8.2 vs. 9.9 ± 13.8, p = 0.035) and the CXR score (1.9 ± 0.3 vs. 1.6 ± 0.5, p = 0.04) were better in the NPV subgroup. There was no mortality and no intergroup difference in morbidity. In this retrospective study, NITS with adjuvant transthoracic NPV resulted in better 24 h oxygenation measures than PPV in both the LVRS and wedge groups, and in better lung expansion according to the CXR score in the wedge group.

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.

The nodule in the emphysematous lung: an appeal for surgery in a lung volume reduction concept.

Emphysema patients, who are candidates for lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) usually present with an extensive smoking history and thus have an increased risk for lung. The incidence of pulmonary nodules in emphysematous lungs is high. We therefore aimed to analyse the incidence and histological findings of pulmonary nodules in our LVRS program. We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who underwent LVRS between 2016 and 2018. Data concerning preoperative workup, 30 days mortality and histopathological findings analysed. Between 2016 and 2018, LVRS was performed in 66 patients. In 18 (27%) a nodule was found in the preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan. Histological findings revealed in two cases squamous cell lung cancer. In two other cases, histopathological findings revealed an anthracotic intrapulmonary lymph node. In eight cases, a tuberculoma was found with a positive culture in one case. The other six histopathological findings were hamartoma, granuloma or sequelae of pneumonia. Malignancy was found in 11.1% of patients presenting with a nodule in preoperative LVRS workup. The relative risk of lung cancer in emphysema patients is increased and if LVRS criteria are fulfilled surgical resection of a pulmonary nodule is a meaningful way to verify the histology.

Urgent lung volume reduction surgery is effective for secondary pneumothorax in emphysema patients.

Secondary pneumothorax due to emphysema can be life-threatening and requires surgery in most situations. Here, we extended lung resection to close the fistula using lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). We present a patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and secondary spontaneous pneumothorax referred after ineffective treatment by chemical pleurodesis. Urgent LVRS followed by elective LVRS was performed obtaining air-leak resolution and significantly improving pulmonary function and quality of life. We discuss the surgical technique and effectiveness of LVRS as a treatment for pneumothorax.