Long-term survival after thoracoscopic lung volume reduction: a multiinstitutional review

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.

Postoperative complications and management after lung volume reduction surgery

The aim of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for patients suffering from severe emphysema is to improve lung function and palliate dyspnea. Careful patient selection in a multidisciplinary approach in a high-volume center is mandatory for a successful outcome. Pulmonary complications including air leak and pneumonia as well as cardiac complications are the most common complications after LVRS. The following article will focus on most common complications observed after LVRS and review the management strategies to improve surgical outcome.

Utility of serum Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen to evaluate the risk of severe acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

Recent studies have shown that the microbiome, namely Aspergillus species, play a previously unrecognized role in both stable and exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Galactomannan is a major component of the Aspergillus cell wall that has been widely used as a diagnostic marker.

Objectives

To explore whether serum levels of Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen could be used to evaluate the risk of severe acute exacerbation of COPD (AE-COPD).

Methods

We measured the Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen levels of 191 patients with stable COPD, and examined its clinical relevance including AE-COPD.

Results

There were 77 (40.3%) patients who were positive for serum Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen (≥0.5). High Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen level (≥0.7) was associated with older age and presence of bronchiectasis and cysts on computed tomography images. Compared to patients with low Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen level (<0.7), patients with high Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen level had significantly higher incidence of severe AE-COPD (P = 0.0039, Gray’s test) and respiratory-related mortality (P = 0.0176, log-rank test). Multivariate analysis showed that high Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen level was independently associated with severe AE-COPD (hazard ratio, 2.162; 95% confidence interval, 1.267−3.692; P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Serum Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen was detected in patients with COPD, and elevated serum Aspergillus-galactomannan antigen was associated with severe AE-COPD.

Surgical interventions for emphysema

Three surgical procedures are pertinent to the treatment of end-stage emphysema: giant bullectomy, lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS), and lung transplantation. Patients with localized disease manifesting as a giant bulla that compresses adjacent healthy lung tissues can be offered bullectomy. Patients with diffuse disease can be offered LVRS, lung transplantation, or staged LVRS/lung transplant, depending on multiple factors including age, lung function parameters, lobar predominance, and whether the disease is uni- or bilateral. Since end-stage emphysema is refractory to most medical treatment, surgery is often the only remaining option.

Genetics of postoperative complications following thoracic surgery

The field of complex trait-gene interaction research has expanded exponentially in recent years, and new insights into the ways patients respond to surgical stimuli have arisen from this body of work. From a physiological systems perspective, thoracic surgical procedures (thoracotomy in particular) represent a massive input stimulus, and it is, therefore, not surprising that approximately 30% of these patients experience an adverse postoperative event. The best risk prediction models have typically explained about 60% to 70% of the risk, leaving a large residual component unaccounted for. It is quite possible that there is a genetic (heritable) component to this residual risk. This article explores some of the concepts underlying gene-disease interactions, the preliminary work that has been done to date in this area, and finally discusses some of the more important methodological issues involved in complex trait association study design.

Lung volume reduction surgery

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been widely studied and has been available for the treatment of advanced emphysema for 10 years. This paper reviews some of the historical attempts at surgical treatment of emphysema, the physiology of LVRS, and the modern data on patient selection, risks, and benefits. Data from the National Emphysema Treatment Trial are presented in the context of the large body of case series and smaller randomized trials that have preceded that study. Future technologies of bronchoscopic lung volume reduction are also discussed.

Short- and long-term outcome of lung volume reduction surgery. The predictive value of the preoperative clinical status and lung scintigraphy

The NETT study assessed the benefits of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) versus medical treatment. However, data is available only on the early outcome of LVRS (24 months). We evaluate the factors affecting the outcome at one-year and up to 6 years after LVRS. Thirty-seven patients underwent LVRS. Thirty-five patients, who survived the operation for at least one-year, were followed up to 6 years. Patients' laboratory, clinical and scintigraphic data before surgery were reviewed retrospectively, and follow-up at one-year and at the end of data collection. Successful LVRS with improvement of FEV(1)30% at one-year was observed in 13 of 35 patients. Five of these patients had initial FEV(1) values of <20% of the predicted. The group of patients with improvement was younger as compared to the 22 patients without improvement (P<0.005). The younger age group used less supplemental oxygen and had a PDiff of >23%. Combinations of age under 60 years and PDiff >23% were a favorable factor (P<0.002) for successful LVRS. Thirty-four patients were followed up to 6 years. Fifteen of the 34 patients (44.1%) remained well. Use of supplemental oxygen before surgery, and FEV(1) improvement of 30% at one-year after surgery were good prognostic factors. We concluded that the long-term success of LVRS is affected by non-dependence on oxygen supplementation before surgery, and the one-year post-surgical improvement of FEV(1) (30%). Based on our findings, the subgroup of patients below 60 years old with severe disease (FEV(1)<20%) and heterogeneous upper lobe emphysema (Pdiff>23%) has improved outcome.

Elective surgery for giant bullous emphysema: a 5-year clinical and functional follow-up

BACKGROUND

So far, very few studies in the literature have reported data on the long-term follow-up of patients who have undergone surgery for giant bullous emphysema (GBE), and much still needs to be known on the late fate of these patients.

AIMS

To evaluate patients who have undergone elective surgery due to GBE, early and late mortality following surgery, the early and late reappearance of bullae, and the early and late modifications of clinical and functional data.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Forty-one consecutive patients (36 men; mean [+/- SD] age, 48.4 +/- 14.8 years) who underwent elective surgery for GBE were enrolled in a prospective study, and were studied both before and after undergoing bullectomy for a 5-year-follow-up period. Analyses were performed on the whole population and on two subgroups of patients who were divided on the basis of the absence of underlying diffuse emphysema (group A; n = 23) or the presence of underlying diffuse emphysema (group B; n = 18).

RESULTS

The early mortality rate was 7.3% (within the first year), and the late mortality rate was 4.9% (overall mortality rate at 5 years, 12.2%; mortality rate in group B, 27.8%). Bullae did not reappear and residual bullae did not become enlarged in any patients at the site of the bullectomy. During the follow-up, the dyspnea score was reduced significantly soon after bullectomy and up to the fourth year of follow-up; intrathoracic gas volume also was reduced significantly (average, 0.7 L). The same was true for the FEV1 percent predicted and the FEV1/vital capacity ratio, which kept increasing until the second year; then, from the third year of follow-up these values were reduced, yet remained above the prebullectomy values until the fifth year of follow-up. When considered separately, the patients in group B appeared to be the most impaired, clinically and functionally (eg, FEV1 showed a similar significant increase up to the second year in both groups after surgery, while a different mean annual decrease was appreciable from the second to the fifth year of follow-up: group A, 25 mL/year; group B, 83 mL/year. Furthermore, patients in group B were the only ones who contributed to the mortality rate, on the whole showing a behavior similar to that of patients who had undergone lung volume reduction surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with GBE who were enrolled in the study prospectively and were investigated yearly during a 5-year-follow-up period, elective surgery appears to have been fairly safe, and allowed clinical and functional improvement for at least 5 years. Better results may be expected in patients without underlying diffuse emphysema.

Lung volume reduction surgery as a bridge to lung transplantation

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) improves lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with advanced emphysema. In some patients with emphysema who are candidates for lung transplantation, LVRS is an alternative treatment option to lung transplantation, or may be used as a bridge to lung transplantation. Generally accepted criteria for LVRS include severe non-reversible airflow obstruction due to emphysema associated with significant evidence of lung hyperinflation and air trapping. Both high resolution computed tomography (CT) scan of the chest and quantitative ventilation/perfusion scan are used to identify lung regions with severe emphysema which would be used as targets for lung resection. Bilateral LVRS is the preferred surgical approach compared with the unilateral procedure because of better functional outcome. Lung transplantation is the preferred surgical treatment in patients with emphysema with alpha1 antitrypsin deficiency and in patients with very severe disease who have homogeneous emphysema pattern on CT scan of the chest or very low diffusion capacity.

Model-based versus clinical prediction of the spirometric response to lung volume reduction surgery

BACKGROUND

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) improves symptoms and lung function in selected patients with severe emphysema.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether models based on physiologic and radiologic predictors discriminated patients with a favorable from those with a poor spirometric response to LVRS.

METHODS

Data of a derivation cohort of 70 patients who had previously undergone LVRS served to develop two types of prediction models, lookup functions and logistic regression equations. Presence or absence of improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) > or =300 ml and forced vital capacity (FVC) > or =500 ml represented dichotomous outcomes. The residual volume/total lung capacity ratio, CT-radiological emphysema heterogeneity scores and diffusing capacity, a marker of emphysema severity, were the predictors. Models were used to predict spirometric outcomes for a validation cohort of 60 emphysema patients referred for LVRS. Furthermore, the surgeon preoperatively estimated outcomes based on all available clinical data but blinded to model predictions. Spirometric changes within 6 months following surgery were compared to predictions.

RESULTS

Median FEV1 in the validation cohort increased from 0.69 to 1.00 liters (+41%), and FVC from 2.07 to 2.78 liters (+29%; p < 0.05 for changes). Lookup functions and logistic regression equations identified patients experiencing major increases in FEV1 > or =300 ml and FVC > or =500 ml with an accuracy quantified by areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves of 0.72 to 0.76 (all areas >0.5, p < 0.05). Predictions by the surgeon had an accuracy of 0.71 to 0.78 (p = NS vs. models).

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of models based on three predictors was fair and similar to assessment by an experienced surgeon based on all available clinical information. Prediction models may contribute to the consistent assessment of LVRS candidates.

Results of unilateral lung volume reduction surgery in patients with distinct heterogeneity of emphysema between lungs

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to analyze the comprehensive outcome of unilateral lung volume reduction in patients with distinct heterogeneity of emphysema between lungs assessed by a visual radiologic scoring system.

METHODS

Ninety-seven patients who underwent intentional unilateral lung volume reduction because of distinct heterogeneity of emphysema between lungs (asymmetric ratio of emphysema >/=1.1) between 1995 and 2003 were evaluated. Baseline median measures were 0.83 L for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, 5.0 L for residual volume, 380 m for 6-minute walking test distance, 0.50 for maximal incremental treadmill test score, and 25 for physical functioning domain score assessed by the Short Form-36 Quality of Life questionnaire.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 34 months. Significant improvements occurred for as long as 36 months in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (+24%), residual volume (-12%), Short Form-36 Quality of Life questionnaire physical functioning domain score (+100%), 6-minute walking test distance (+18%), and maximal incremental treadmill test score (+200%). A direct correlation was found between asymmetric ratio of emphysema and change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second ( r = 0.65, P < .00001). At 60 months, residual volume (-6.2%), maximal incremental treadmill test score (+100%), and Short Form-36 Quality of Life questionnaire physical functioning domain score (+70%) were still significantly improved. Five-year survival was 82%; 5-year freedom from contralateral lung volume reduction was 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series, significant, long-lasting improvements and satisfactory survival were seen after intentional unilateral lung volume reduction. Heterogeneity of emphysema between lungs was directly correlated with improvement at 36 months in forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Our results suggest that unilateral lung volume reduction is a suitable option for patients with distinct heterogeneity of emphysema between lungs.

Innovative approaches to lung volume reduction for emphysema

The 10 years of resurgent interest in lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) and recent National Emphysema Treatment Trial findings for emphysema have stimulated a range of innovative alternative ideas aimed at improving outcomes and reducing complications associated with current LVRS techniques. Concepts being actively investigated at this time include surgical resection with compression/banding devices, endobronchial blockers, sealants, obstructing devices and valves, and bronchial bypass methods. These novel approaches are reaching the stage of clinical trials at this time. Theory, design issues, methods, potential advantages and limitations, and available results are presented. Extensive research in the near future will help to determine the potential clinical applicability of these new approaches to the treatment of emphysema symptoms.

[Lung volume reduction surgery for emphysema: a unilateral or bilateral approach?]

INTRODUCTION

Lung Volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is a recognized therapeutic option for patients presenting with severe and disabling pulmonary emphysema. Case selection is based upon clinical, morphological and functional criteria.

STATE OF THE ART

LVRS has shown promising results, with improvements in exercise capacity, pulmonary function and quality of life, in selected patients with severe and disabling emphysema. A variety of surgical techniques have been described. The procedure may be unilateral or bilateral, through a sternotomy or by a video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) technique. The controversial aspects of the surgical technique will be analysed and discussed in the following review.

PERSPECTIVES

A bilateral approach clearly offers a better functional improvement when compared to a unilateral procedure, however, the postoperative functional decline appears greater and more rapid after a bilateral procedure. A unilateral approach, with often less postoperative morbidity, allows the option to perform a future contra-lateral procedure in the event of further clinical or functional deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected cases LVRS is an effective treatment for severe pulmonary emphysema. Different surgical techniques have been described. Nowadays VATS is considered to be the technique of choice, with the option to carry out a future unilateral or bilateral procedure.

Complications after lung volume reduction surgery

LVRS has greater morbidity than most general thoracic surgical procedures. Proper care of patients after LVRS is a labor-intensive activity, but it is worthwhile because LVRS can be performed with acceptable risk. Patient selection, postoperative care, and an understanding of the potential complications are the keys to successful LVRS.

Long-term outcome of bilateral lung volume reduction in 250 consecutive patients with emphysema

OBJECTIVE

Numerous reports have confirmed the early benefits of lung volume reduction surgery for selected patients with emphysema. This report documents the long-term survival and functional results after lung volume reduction surgery.

METHODS

Between January 1993 and June 2000, a total of 250 consecutive patients underwent bilateral lung volume reduction surgery through median sternotomy at our institution. All patients had disabling dyspnea, thoracic hyperinflation, and a heterogeneous pattern of emphysema with suitable target areas for resection. Preoperative pulmonary rehabilitation was required and post-rehabilitation data were used as the baseline for data analysis. Follow-up ranged from 1.8 to 9.1 years (median 4.4 years).

RESULTS

Prolonged air leaks (>7 days) were the most common complication (45.2%, n = 113). Reexploration rates for air leak and bleeding were 3.2% (n = 8) and 1.2% (n = 3), respectively. Eighteen patients (7.2%) required reintubation and mechanical ventilation. The in-hospital mortality in this series was 4.8% (n = 12). The median length of hospitalization was 9 days (range 4-168 days). Kaplan-Meier survivals after lung volume reduction surgery were 93.6%, 84.4%, and 67.7% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Eighteen patients (7.2%) have subsequently undergone lung transplantation after a median interval of 4.3 years (range 2.1-6.4 years). Spirometric values, lung volumes, and gas exchange parameters improved after surgery. The forced expiratory volume in 1 second and the residual volume showed statistically significant improvements between preoperative values and each time point of follow-up. Health-related quality of life showed significant postoperative improvement and with time correlated well with the improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung volume reduction surgery produces significant functional improvement for selected patients with emphysema. For most of these patients, benefits appear to last at least 5 years.

Health-related quality of life after lung volume reduction surgery

Many studies have demonstrated short-term physiologic benefits and improvements in various measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). However, LVRS involves short-term risks of morbidity, disability, and mortality. Few reports describe the long-term effects of LVRS on patients with emphysema. Rational decision making about LVRS depends on whether the expected improvement in quality of life from LVRS outweighs the expected disability and morbidity and the potential mortality from the procedure. This report describes the HRQOL and survival outcomes of patients with emphysema after LVRS.

Lung volume reduction: where do we stand?

The concept of lung volume resection (LVR) was introduced in 1995 for the treatment of end-stage emphysema patients utilizing stapled resection through a median stenotomy approach. This article discusses this procedure and the trials that have been instituted. LVR might prove to be a viable alternative treatment modality for selected, end-stage emphysema patients in the future.

Outcomes of lung volume reduction surgery followed by lung transplantation: a matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been demonstrated to provide symptomatic relief and to improve lung function in patients with end-stage emphysema. The goal of this study was to assess the additional morbidity associated with lung transplantation after LVRS for end-stage emphysema with regard to immediate postoperative outcomes, longitudinal spirometry, and survival rates compared to an age-, gender-, procedure-matched, and transplant time-matched cohort that had lung transplantation alone.

METHODS

We compared the postoperative and long-term outcomes of a sequential procedure cohort to a matched cohort to assess the possible added post-transplant morbidity.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients who underwent sequential LVRS (including 11 unilateral LVRS, 4 bilateral LVRS) and lung transplantation (ipsilateral in 7 and contralateral in 8) on average 28.1 +/- 17.2 months (median, 27.4 months; range, 3.7 to 61.7 months) later were assessed. No significant differences were noted in pretransplant demographics, post-transplant variables, longitudinal spirometric indices, or survival. A trend toward a lower pretransplant arterial carbon dioxide tension was apparent in the sequential procedure cohort. Group analysis revealed a significant increase in the number of patients requiring transfusion and in the total number of units transfused in patients undergoing ispsilateral transplantation after LVRS; a significant increase in the length of intensive care unit stay; and a trend toward an increase in the duration of hospital stay in patients undergoing lung transplantation within 18 months of LVRS.

CONCLUSIONS

In appropriate candidates, LVRS bridged the time to transplantation by an average of 28.1 +/- 17.2 months (median, 27.4 months; range, 3.7 to 61.7 months) without significantly increasing post-transplant morbidity or mortality. Furthermore, bilateral LVRS bridged the time to transplantation to a greater extent than unilateral LVRS (34.9 +/- 29.8 months; median, 32.1 months versus 25.4 +/- 16.3 months; median, 22.3 months; p = 0.23).

Lung function 5 yr after lung volume reduction surgery for emphysema

Current datum more than 2 yr after lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for emphysema is limited. This prospective study evaluates pre-LVRS baseline and 5-yr results in 26 symptomatic patients (mean age 67 +/- 6 yr) (mean +/- SD) who underwent bilateral, targeted upper lobe stapled LVRS using video-assisted thoracoscopy. Baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) was 0.7 +/- 0.2 L (mean +/- SD), 29 +/- 10% predicted. Following LVRS, with none lost to follow-up, mortality due to respiratory failure at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 yr was 4%, 4%, 19%, 31%, 46%, and 58%, respectively. Increase above baseline for FEV(1) > 200 ml and/or FVC > 400 ml at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 yr post-LVRS was noted in 73%, 46%, 35%, 27%, and 8% of all patients; decrease in dyspnea grade >/= 1 in 88%, 69%, 46%, 27%, and 15%; and elimination of initial oxygen dependence in 18 patients in 78%, 50%, 33%, 22%, and 0%, respectively. Expiratory airflow improved due to the increase in both lung elastic recoil and small airway intraluminal caliber. Five patients decreased FEV(1) 141 +/- 60 ml/yr and FVC 102 +/- 189 ml/yr over 3.8 +/- 1.2 yr post-LVRS, similar to their pre-LVRS rate of decline. In the 11 patients who survived 5 yr, at 0.5-1.0 yr post-LVRS peak increase in FEV(1) was 438 +/- 366 ml, with a decline of 149 +/- 157 ml the following year and 78 +/- 59 ml/yr over 4.0-4.5 yr. Bilateral LVRS provided palliative clinical and physiological improvement in 9 of 26 patients at 3 yr, 7 at 4 yr, and 2 at 5 yr.

Surgery for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the place for lung volume reduction and transplantation

Lung volume reduction surgery and lung transplantation have been shown to improve lung function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with advanced emphysema. Because the indications for both surgical procedures overlap, lung volume reduction surgery may be used as an alternative treatment or as a "bridge" to lung transplantation. In this article, we discuss patient selection, clinical outcome parameters, and the morbidity and mortality associated with each surgical procedure. We focus on the different preoperative predictors of good and poor outcomes after lung volume reduction surgery, the role of pulmonary rehabilitation, and the preferred surgical techniques for lung volume reduction surgery. An overview of the postoperative care of emphysema patients who undergo single-lung transplantation is also discussed.

Risk analysis for thoracoscopic lung volume reduction: a multi-institutional experience

OBJECTIVE

Most reports of thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (TLVR) are relatively small and early experiences from a single institution, factors which limit both the statistical validity and the applicability to the population at large. In order to address these shortcomings we undertook an analysis of the TLVR experience at five separate institutions to assess operative morbidity and identify predictors of mortality.

METHODS

Questionnaires were sent to four groups of surgical investigators at five institutions actively performing TLVR. Data was requested regarding preoperative, operative and postoperative parameters. Twenty-five potential predictors of mortality were analyzed and seven proved to be at least marginally significant (P<0.10). These parameters were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors.

RESULTS

The 682 patients (415 males, 267 females, mean age 64.0 years) underwent unilateral (410) or bilateral (272) TLVRs. Overall, operative mortality was 6% with half of the deaths resulting from respiratory causes. The remaining patients were discharged to home (88%), a rehabilitation facility (4%) or a ventilator facility (2%). There were 25 perioperative factors chosen representing clinically important indices such as spirometry, oxygenation, functional status, clinical and demographic variables. Univariate analysis identified seven variables as predictors of mortality (P<0.10) and these were entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Only age, 6-min walk, gender (male 8%, female 3% mortality) and the procedure performed (unilateral 4.6%, bilateral 8%) were independent predictors while preoperative steroid therapy, preoperative oxygen administration, and time since smoking cessation dropped out of the model. The specific institution, learning curve (early vs. late experience), type of lung disease, spirometric indices and predicted maximum VO(2) were not significant predictors.

CONCLUSION

This experience suggests that unilateral and bilateral lung volume reduction procedure can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Although age, gender, exercise capacity and the procedure performed are all independent predictors of mortality, the risk of operative death did not appear excessive in this fragile patient subset.

Comparison of clinical results for unilateral and bilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction

BACKGROUND

It is widely believed that bilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (BTLVR) yields superior results when compared with unilateral thoracoscopic lung volume reduction (UTLVR) with regard to spirometry, functional capacity, oxygenation and quality of life results.

METHODS

To address these issues, we compared the results of patients undergoing UTLVR (N = 338 patients) and BTLVR (N = 344 patients) from 1993 to 1998 at five institutions. Follow-up data were available on 671 patients (98.4%) between 6 and 12 months after surgery, and a patient self-assessment was obtained at a mean of 24 months.

RESULTS

It was found that BTLVR provides superior improvement in measured postoperative percent change in FEV1 (L) (UTLVR 23.3% +/- 55.3 vs BTLVR 33% +/- 41, p = 0.04), FVC(L) (10.5% +/- 31.6 vs 20.3% +/- 34.3, p = 0.002) and RV(L) (-13% +/- -22 vs -22% +/- 17.9, p = 0.015). BTLVR also provides a slight improvement over UTLVR in patient's perception regarding improved quality of life (UTLVR 79% vs BTLVR 88%, p = 0.03) and dyspnea relief (71% vs 61%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in mean changes in PO2 (mm Hg) (UTLV 4.5 +/- 12.3 vs BTLVR 4.9 +/- 13.3, p = NS), 6-minute walk (UTLVR 26% +/- 66.1 vs BTLVR 31% +/- 59.6, p = NS) or decreased oxygen utilization (UTLVR 78% vs BTLVR 74%, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that both UTLVR and BTLVR yield significant improvement, but the results of BTLVR seem to be superior with regard to spirometry, lung volumes, and quality of life.

Surgical strategy for lung volume reduction surgery

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been a popular procedure since the early 1990s. It appears that there has developed a consensus in the literature that the ideal patient is one with evidence of marked hyperinflation and heterogenous disease. In this patient profile, LVRS has produced excellent results with respect to lung function and improved exercise tolerance. General areas of controversy are discussed which include the role of lasers; unilateral versus bilateral procedures; the role of a staged unilateral procedure; and which surgical route is best for patients. The existing literature is reviewed on these issues.