Long-Term Results After Lung Volume Reduction Surgery: A Single Institution’s Experience

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

Background

Bronchoscopic 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

A 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).

Conclusions

LVRS 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.

[Efficacy and Safety of Medical Thoracoscopic Bulla Volume Reduction in the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Combined With Giant Emphysematous Bullae]

Objective

To explore the efficacy and safety of medical thoracoscopic bulla volume reduction for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combined with giant emphysematous bullae (GEB).

Methods

A total of 66 patients with COPD combined with GEB were enrolled in the study. All the subjects received treatment at Zhengzhou Central Hospital affiliated with Zhengzhou University between March 2021 and December 2022. The subjects were divided into two groups, a medical thoracoscope group consisting of 30 cases treated with medical thoracoscopic bulla volume reduction and a surgical thoracoscope group consisting of 36 cases treated by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. All patients were followed up before discharge and 3 months and 6 months after discharge. The preoperative and postoperative levels of the pulmonary function, 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores and differences in postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. The operative duration, postoperative length-of-stay, and surgical costs and hospitalization bills, and the maximum visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at 24 h after the procedure were assessed.

Results

The baseline data of the two groups were comparable, showing no statistically significant difference. The forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) 6 months after the procedures improved in both the medical thoracoscopy group ([0.78±0.29] L vs. [1.02±0.31] L, P<0.001) and the surgical thoracoscopy group ([0.80±0.21] L vs. [1.03±0.23] L, P<0.001) compared to that before the procedures. Improvements to a certain degree in 6MWT and SGRQ scores were also observed in the two groups at 3 months and 6 months after the procedures (P<0.05). In addition, no statistically significant difference in these indexes was observed during the follow-up period of the patients in the two groups. There was no significant difference in operating time between the two groups. The medical thoracoscopy group had shorter postoperative length-of-stay ([7.3±2.6] d) and 24-hour postoperative VAS pain scores (3.0 [2.0, 3.3]) than the surgical thoracoscopic group did ([10.4±4.3] d and 4.5 [3.0, 5.0], respectively), with the differences being statistically significant (P<0.05). Surgical cost and total hospitalization bills were lower in the medical thoracoscopy group than those in the surgical thoracoscopy group (P<0.05). The complication rate in the medical thoracoscopy group was lower than that in the surgical thoracoscopy group (46.7% vs. 52.8%), but the difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Medical thoracoscopic reduction of bulla volume can significantly improve the pulmonary function, quality of life, and exercise tolerance of patients with COPD combined with GEB, and it can reduce postoperative short-term pain and shorten postoperative length-of-stay. The procedure has the advantages of minimal invasiveness, quick recovery, and low costs. Hence extensive clinical application is warranted.

Surgical and bronchoscopic pulmonary function-improving procedures in lung emphysema

COPD is a highly prevalent, chronic and irreversible obstructive airway disease without curative treatment. Standard therapeutic strategies, both non-pharmacological and pharmacological, have only limited effects on lung function parameters of patients with severe disease. Despite optimal pharmacological treatment, many patients with severe COPD still have a high burden of dyspnoea and a poor quality of life. If these patients have severe lung emphysema, with hyperinflation as the driver of symptoms and exercise intolerance, lung volume reduction may be an effective treatment with a significant impact on lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life. Currently, different lung volume reduction approaches, both surgical and bronchoscopic, have shown encouraging results and have been implemented in COPD treatment recommendations. Nevertheless, choosing the optimal lung volume reduction strategy for an individual patient remains challenging. Moreover, there is still room for improving durability of effect and safety in all available procedures. Ongoing and innovative research is essential to push this field forwards. This review provides an overview of results and limitations of the current lung volume reduction options for patients with severe lung emphysema and hyperinflation.

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.

Dissemination and Implementation Science in Cardiothoracic Surgery: A Review and Case Study

Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science is the practice of taking evidence-based interventions (EBI) and sustainably incorporating them in routine clinical practice. As a relatively young field, D&I techniques are underutilized in cardiothoracic surgery. This review offers an overview of D&I science from the context of the cardiothoracic surgeon. First, we provide a general introduction to D&I science and basic terminology that is used in the field. Second, to illustrate D&I techniques in a real-world example, we discuss a case study for implementing lung protective management (LPM) strategies for lung donor optimization nationally. Finally, we discuss challenges to successful implementation that are unique to cardiothoracic surgery and give several examples of EBIs that have been poorly implemented into surgical practice. We also provide examples of successful D&I interventions - including de-implementation strategies - from other surgical subspecialties. We hope that this review offers additional tools for cardiothoracic surgeons to explore when introducing EBIs into routine practice.

Life Expectancy and Rate of Decline After Lung Volume Reduction Surgery

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) patient selection guidelines are based on the National Emphysema Treatment Trial. Because of increased mortality and poor improvement in functional outcomes, patients with non-upper lobe emphysema and low baseline exercise capacity are determined as poor candidates for LVRS. In well-selected patients with heterogeneous emphysema, LVRS has a durable long-term outcome at up to 5-years of follow-up. Five-year survival rates in patients range between 63% and 78%. LVRS seems a durable alternative for end-stage heterogeneous emphysema in patients not eligible for lung transplantation. Future studies will help identify eligible patients with homogeneous emphysema for LVRS.

Quasilobar minimalist lung volume reduction surgery

 

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to assess the results and the costs of the quasilobar minimalist (QLM) thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (LVR) surgical method developed to minimize the trauma from the operation and the anaesthesia and to maximize the effect of the lobar volume reduction.

METHODS

Forty patients with severe emphysema underwent QLM-LVR that entailed adoption of sole intercostal block analgesia and lobar plication through a single thoracoscopic incision. Results were compared after propensity matching with 2 control groups undergoing non-awake resectional LVR with double-lumen tracheal intubation or awake non-resectional LVR by plication with thoracic epidural anaesthesia. As a result, we had 3 matched groups of 30 patients each.

RESULTS

Baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 s, residual volume, the 6-min walking test and the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea index were 0.77 ± 0.18, 4.97 ± 0.6, 328 ± 65 and 3.3 ± 0.7, respectively, with no intergroup difference after propensity score matching. The visual pain score was better (P < 0.007), the hospital stay was shorter (P < 0.04) and overall costs were lower (P < 0.04) in the QLM-LVR group than in the control groups. The morbidity rate was lower with QLM-LVR than with non-awake resectional-LVR (P = 0.006). Significant improvements (P < 0.001) occurred in all study groups during the follow-up period. At 24 months, improvements in residual volume and dyspnoea index were significantly better with QLM-LVR (P < 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

QLM-LVR proved safe and showed better perioperative outcomes and lower procedure-related costs than the control groups. Similar clinical benefit occurred at 12 months, but absolute improvements in residual volume and dyspnoea index were better in the QLM-LVR group at 24 months.

Patient-directed Volume Reduction for Emphysema: Sequential Surgical and Endobronchial Techniques

BACKGROUND

Lung volume reduction (LVR) surgery has traditionally been performed as a 1-stage bilateral procedure or staged at a predetermined interval. However to maximize the overall benefit we have allowed the patient to determine the timing of further interventions and have added endobronchial LVR into the protocol. We have reviewed the long-term outcome.

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-one LVR procedures were performed on 254 patients (median age, 61 years [range, 23-79]) with baseline predicted lung function of (mean ± SD) forced expiratory volume in 1 second 28% ± 11% and residual volume 253% ± 53%. The initial procedure was by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in 236 patients (unilateral, 227; bilateral, 9), by open surgery in 5, and by endobronchial valve insertion in 13. Sixty-four patients received a second and 13 a third LVR procedure. The median time interval between first and third stage was 5.8 years (range, 1.9-10) RESULTS: In the subgroup of patients who underwent staged procedures there was a significant improvement in predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second from 28% at baseline to 34% up to 6 years. There was sustained reduction in static lung volumes up to 8 years: Predicted residual volume remained reduced from 259% to 189%. There were sustained improvements over baseline in health status: EuroQol-5D improved from 50 ± 26 to 62 ± 23 (P < .01) for up to 5 years and the Short Form 36-item questionnaire for up to 9 years. Overall 30-day mortality was 3%. Median survival was 5.6 years (95% confidence interval, 4.7-6.9).

CONCLUSIONS

A program of staged unilateral procedures of LVR has resulted in sustained benefits for up to 9 years in physiology and health status.

Consolidating Lung Volume Reduction Surgery After Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Failure

BACKGROUND

Bronchoscopic valve placement constitutes an effective endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) therapy in patients with severe emphysema and low collateral ventilation. After the most destroyed lobe is occluded with valves, significant target lobe volume reduction leads to improvements in lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life. The effects are not consistent in some patients, leading to long-term therapy failure. We hypothesized that surgical lung volume reduction (LVRS) would reestablish ELVR short-term clinical improvements after ELVR long-term failure.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center analysis included all patients who underwent consolidating LVRS by lobectomy after long-term failure of valve therapy between 2010 and 2015. Changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, residual volume, 6-minute walking distance, and Modified Medical Research Council dyspnea score 90 days after ELVR and LVRS were analyzed, and the outcomes of both procedures were compared.

RESULTS

LVRS was performed in 20 patients after ELVR failure. A lower lobectomy was performed in 90%. The 30-day mortality of the cohort was 0% and 90-day mortality was 5% (1 of 20). The remaining 19 patients showed a significant increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (+27.5% ± 19.4%) and a reduction in residual volume (-21.0% ± 17.4%) and total lung capacity (-11.1% ± 11.1%). This resulted in significant improvements in exercise tolerance (6-minute walking distance: +56 ± 60 m) and relief of dyspnea (ΔModified Medical Research Council: -1.8 ± 1.4 points.).

CONCLUSIONS

Consolidating LVRS by lobectomy after failure of a previously successful ELVR is feasible and results in significant symptom relief and improvement of lung function.