Journal Home
Search for

Volume 139, Issue 4, Pages 976-983 (April 2010)


View previous. 32 of 90 View next.

Video-assisted thoracic surgery versus open lobectomy for lung cancer: A secondary analysis of data from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0030 randomized clinical trial

Walter J. Scott, MD, FACSaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Mark S. Allen, MDb, Gail Darling, MD, FRCSC, FACSc, Bryan Meyers, MDd, Paul A. Decker, MSb, Joe B. Putnam, MDe, Robert W. Mckenna, MDf, Rodney J. Landrenau, MDg, David R. Jones, MDh, Richard I. Inculet, MDi, Richard A. Malthaner, MDi

Received 19 June 2009; received in revised form 30 September 2009; accepted 22 November 2009. published online 22 February 2010.

Objective

Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy remains controversial. We compared outcomes from participants in a randomized study comparing lymph node sampling versus dissection for early-stage lung cancer who underwent either video-assisted thoracoscopic or open lobectomy.

Methods

Data from 964 participants in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0030 trial were used to construct propensity scores for video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy (based on age, gender, histology, performance status, tumor location, and T1 vs T2). Propensity scores were used to estimate the adjusted risks of short-term outcomes of surgery. Patients were classified into 5 equal-sized groups and compared using conditional logistic regression or repeated measures analysis of variance.

Results

A total of 752 patients (66 video-assisted and 686 open procedures) were analyzed on the basis of propensity score stratification. Median operative time was shorter for video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (video-assisted thoracoscopy 117.5 minutes vs open 171.5 minutes; P < .001). Median total number of lymph nodes retrieved (dissection group only) was similar (video-assisted thoracoscopy 15 nodes vs open 19 nodes; P = .147), as were instances of R1/R2 resection (video-assisted thoracoscopy 0% vs open 2.3%; P = .368). Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy had less atelectasis requiring bronchoscopy (0% vs 6.3%, P = .035), fewer chest tubes draining greater than 7 days (1.5% vs 10.8%; P = .029), and shorter median length of stay (5 days vs 7 days; P < .001). Operative mortality was similar (video-assisted thoracoscopy 0% vs open 1.6%, P = 1.0).

Conclusion

Patients undergoing video-assisted lobectomy had fewer respiratory complications and shorter length of stay. These data suggest video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy is safe in patients with resectable lung cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to determine the oncologic equivalency of video-assisted versus open lobectomy.

CTSNet classification10, 11, 28

a Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pa

b Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn

c University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

d Washington University of St Louis, St Louis, Mo

e Vanderbilt, University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn

f University of California, Los Angeles, Calif

g Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pa

h University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va

i London Health Science Center, London, Ontario, Canada

Corresponding Author InformationAddress for reprints: Walter J. Scott, MD, FACS, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, 7701 Burholme Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111.

 Disclosures: None.

 Supported by National Cancer Institute U10 grant CA076001.

PII: S0022-5223(09)01603-1

doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.11.059


View previous. 32 of 90 View next.