Advertisement

Thoracoscopic lobectomy: comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between 3 and 4 incision accesses

Abstract

Aims and background. Several techniques have been proposed to perform a videoassisted thoracic lobectomy. We compared the results of a 3 versus 4-port procedure, analyzing intraoperative data, morbidity, and mortality.
Methods. Prospective analysis of 30 consecutive patients who underwent a 4-port approach video-assisted thoracic lobectomy (group A) and comparison with a historical series with 30 patients who had a 3-port video-assisted thoracic lobectomy (group B).
Results. The groups were comparable for clinical characteristics and pathological staging. There was no difference in operating time: median, 128 min for group A versus 129 min for group B (P = 0.9). There was a significant difference in rate of conversion to thoracotomy: 1 of 30 (3.3%) in group A and 7 of 30 (23.3%) in group B (3 ports) (P = 0.02). In group A, 11 patients (36.7%) experienced postoperative complications and in group B, 13 patients (43.3%; P = 0.6). The difference in median time to drain removal and median length of hospital stay between the two groups was not significant. There was a significant difference in persistent pain between group A and group B: 6 patients (20%) in group B presented with persistent neuropathic pain on regular medication (P = 0.02).
Conclusions. Our study showed that the 4-port approach was similar in operative time, length of drain and hospital stay but showed a statistically significant lower conversion rate and lower rate of persistent pain than the 3-port access.

Tumori 2013; 99(4): 505 - 509

Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

DOI:10.1700/1361.15102

Authors

Andrea Billè, Lawrence Okiror, Werner Draaisma, Debajeet Choudhuri, Karen Harrison-Phipps, Tom Routledge

Article History

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

  • Billè, Andrea [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Okiror, Lawrence [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Draaisma, Werner [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Choudhuri, Debajeet [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Harrison-Phipps, Karen [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Routledge, Tom [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.