Technique of Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy

Single-incision versus multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy: a propensity-matched analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcomes of single-incision and multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy.

BACKGROUND

Reports of single-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy for lung cancer are limited, and a comparison between single-incision and multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy or segmentectomy for lung cancer has not been previously reported.

METHODS

From January 2005 to June 2013, a total of 233 patients with lung cancer underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy or segmentectomy via a single-incision or multiple-incision technique. A propensity-matched analysis, incorporating preoperative variables, was used to compare the short-term outcomes between single-incision and multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 50 patients underwent single-incision thoracoscopic pulmonary resections, including 35 lobectomies and 15 segmentectomies, and 183 patients underwent multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy or segmentectomy between January 2005 and December 2011. Propensity matching produced 46 patients in each group. The length of hospital stay and the complication rate were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Single-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy were associated with shorter operative time (P = 0.029), more numbers of lymph nodes (P = 0.032), and less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.017) than with the multiple-incision approach. No in-hospital mortality occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy are feasible, and perioperative outcomes are comparable with those of the multiple-incision approach.

Thoracoscopic segmentectomy for lung cancer

Lobectomy has long been considered the standard procedure for early-stage lung cancer, and minimally invasive techniques have been demonstrated to be associated with superior outcomes compared with lobectomy by thoracotomy. The use of segmentectomy is under investigation for selected patients with small tumors, and the use of minimally invasive strategies is applicable as well. In this review, we analyzed studies that have compared (1) thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus the open approach, (2) thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus thoracoscopic lobectomy, and (3) thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus thoracoscopic lobectomy versus thoracoscopic wedge resection. When compared with open segmentectomy, preliminarily, thoracoscopic segmentectomy was found to have equivalent oncologic results, with shorter hospital length of stay, reduced rates of morbidity, and lower cost. When compared with thoracoscopic lobectomy, thoracoscopic segmentectomy had equivalent rates of morbidity, recurrence, and survival. Preliminarily, thoracoscopic segmentectomy was found to result in greater preservation of lung function and exercise capacity than the thoracoscopic lobectomy.

Surgical techniques to avoid parenchymal injury during lung resection (fissureless lobectomy)

Thoracoscopic lobectomy has become an accepted, safe, and oncologically sound procedure compared with open lobectomy. Several studies have reported that it reduces the length of stay, postoperative pain, and postoperative complications, including air leaks. Although there are specific technical considerations that must be taken into account, it is increasingly becoming the preferred method of anatomic lobectomy. Surgeons should be encouraged to embrace the minimally invasive strategy, which may be learned in courses using novel simulation techniques. Future directions suggest that this technique will be expanded to address even the most challenging thoracic procedures.