Benignant and malignant epidemiology among surgical resections for suspicious solitary lung cancer without preoperative tissue diagnosis

Is histological confirmation necessary to avoid futile resections? Comparative of 4 university hospitals

OBJECTIVES

There is no consensus in the literature on preoperative histological analysis for lung cancer. The objective of this study was to assess 4 diagnostic models used in different hospitals with differing practices regarding preoperative histological diagnosis and the consequences in terms of unnecessary surgery and futile major resection.

METHODS

We carried out a retrospective observational study collected from 4 university hospitals in Spain over 3 years (January 2019 to December 2021). We included all patients with a confirmed diagnosis of primary lung cancer and any patients with suspected primary lung cancer who had undergone surgery. All patients underwent computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans. Each multidisciplinary committee was free to choose whether to perform flexible bronchoscopic or transthoracic lung biopsy. Decisions concerning whether to perform intraoperative sample analysis, the surgical approach and the type of resection were left to the surgical team.

RESULTS

We included a total of 1642 patients. The use of flexible endoscopy and its diagnostic performance varied substantially between hospitals (range: 23.8-79.3% and 25-60.7%, respectively); and the same was observed for transthoracic biopsy and its performance (range: 16.9-82.3% and 64.6-97%, respectively). Regarding major resection surgery (lobectomy or more extensive resection), the lowest rate was observed in hospital C (1%) and the highest in hospital B (2.8%), with between-hospital differences not reaching significance (P = 0.173).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of histological sampling before lung cancer surgery still varies between hospitals. In spite of very diverse multidisciplinary management, the rate of futile lobectomy is not significantly higher in hospitals with lower rates of preoperative histological analysis.

Opioid-free anaesthesia reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting after thoracoscopic lung resection: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative opioid use has a positive relationship with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) might reduce PONV. We investigated whether OFA compared with opioid-based anaesthesia would reduce PONV during the first 2 postoperative days among patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung resection.

METHODS

In this randomised controlled trial, 120 adult patients were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by sex) to receive either OFA with esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and sevoflurane, or opioid-based anaesthesia with sufentanil and sevoflurane. A surgical pleth index (SPI) of 20-50 was applied for intraoperative analgesia provision. All subjects received PONV prophylaxis (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and multimodal analgesia (flurbiprofen axetil, ropivacaine wound infiltration, and patient-controlled sufentanil). The primary outcome was the occurrence of PONV during the first 48 h after surgery.

RESULTS

The median age was 53 yr and 66.7% were female. Compared with opioid-based anaesthesia, OFA significantly reduced the incidence of PONV (15% vs 31.7%; odds ratio [OR]=0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.91; number needed to treat, 6; P=0.031). Secondary and safety outcomes were comparable between groups, except that OFA led to a lower rate of vomiting (OR=0.23, 95% CI, 0.08-0.77) and a longer length of PACU stay (median difference=15.5 min, 95% CI, 10-20 min). The effects of OFA on PONV did not differ in the prespecified subgroups of sex, smoking status, and PONV risk scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of PONV prophylaxis and multimodal analgesia, SPI-guided opioid-free anaesthesia halved the incidence of PONV after thoracoscopic lung resection, although it was associated with a longer stay in the PACU.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200059710).

Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of ground-glass nodule-like lung cancer

Lung cancer has had one of the highest incidences and mortality in the world over the last few decades, which has aided in the promotion and popularization of screening for lung ground-glass nodules (GGNs). People have great psychological anxiety about GGN because of the chance that it will develop into lung cancer, which makes clinical treatment of GGN a generally excessive phenomenon. Overdiagnosis in screening has recently been mentioned in the literature. An important research emphasis of screening is how to reduce the incidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. This paper discusses from different aspects how to characterize the occurrence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, how to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and future screening, follow-up, and treatment approaches.

Uniportal VATS for Diagnosis and Staging in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Uniportal VATS has become an accepted approach in minimally invasive thoracic surgery since its first report for lobectomy in 2011. Since the initial restrictions in indications, it has been used in almost all procedures, from conventional lobectomies to sublobar resections, bronchial and vascular sleeve procedures and even tracheal and carinal resections. In addition to its use for treatment, it provides an excellent approach for suspicious solitary undiagnosed nodules after bronchoscopic or transthoracic image-guided biopsy. Uniportal VATS is also used as a surgical staging method in NSCLC due to its low invasiveness in terms of chest tube duration, hospital stay and postoperative pain. In this article, we review the evidence of uniportal VATS accuracy for NSCLC diagnosis and staging and provide technical details and recommendations for its safe performance for that purpose.