Early postoperative pain after subxiphoid uniportal thoracoscopic major lung resection: a prospective, single- blinded, randomized controlled trial

Postoperative day 1 discharge following subxiphoid thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection: a single-centre, postoperative enhanced recovery experience

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to assess the safety and quality of recovery (QOR) after discharge on postoperative day (POD) 1 following subxiphoid thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection within an advanced Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted. Characteristics, perioperative and outcome data, compliance with ERAS pathways and a home-transition QOR survey were analysed using a multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

From January 2020 to January 2022, a total of 201 consecutive patients underwent subxiphoid multiportal thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection, comprising 108 lobectomies and 93 sublobar resections (SLRs) (59 complex SLRs and 34 simple SLRs). Among them, 113 patients (56%) were discharged on POD 1, 49% after a lobectomy, 59% after a simple sublobar resection and 68% after a complex sublobar resection. In the multivariable analysis, age > 74 years and duration of the operation were associated with discharge after POD 1, whereas forced expiratory volume in 1 s and complex SLRs were associated with discharge on POD 1. Chest tube removal was achieved on POD 0 in 58 patients (29%), and 138 patients (69%) were free from a chest tube on POD 1. There were 13% with in-hospital morbidity, 10% with 90-day readmission (7% after POD 1 discharge and 14% in patients discharged after POD 1), and 0.5% with 90-day mortality. Patients discharged on POD 1 showed better compliance with the ERAS pathway with early chest tube removal and opioid-free analgesia. The home-transition QOR survey reported a better experience of returning home after discharge on POD 1 and similar pain scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative day 1 discharge can be safely achieved in appropriately selected patients after subxiphoid thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection, with excellent outcomes and high quality of recovery, supported by early chest tube removal as a determinant ERAS pathway.

Suction versus non-suction drainage strategy after uniportal thoracoscopic lung surgery: a prospective cohort study

Background

The postoperative outcomes of suction drainage versus non-suction drainage after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UniVATS) come with little consensus. This study aimed to prospectively compare the postoperative outcomes of suction drainage versus non-suction drainage in patients who underwent UniVATS.

Methods

Between October 2022 and January 2023, patients undergoing UniVATS were prospectively enrolled. The choice of drainage strategy (suction or non-suction) was at the surgeon's discretion. The primary outcome was chest tube duration, with secondary outcomes including postoperative drainage volume, pain scores, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization cost. Baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to identify risk factors for postoperative outcomes.

Results

A total of 206 patients were enrolled in this study, with 103 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced. The chest tube duration did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, suction drainage exhibited a significantly lower total drainage volume compared to non-suction drainage (280.00 vs. 400.00 mL, P=0.03). Suction drainage was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay (3.00 vs. 4.00 days, P<0.001) and lower pain score on the second postoperative day (POD). Multivariable analyses also confirmed that suction drainage was significantly correlated with a lower total drainage volume and a shorter postoperative hospital stay.

Conclusions

These findings suggested that the suction drainage was superior to non-suction drainage in terms of postoperative drainage volume and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing UniVATS.

Robotic thoracic surgery using the single-port robotic system: Initial experience with more than 100 cases

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to report the initial experiences of 115 patients who underwent robotic thoracic surgery using the da Vinci single-port robotic surgical system (Intuitive Surgical).

METHODS

Robotic thoracic surgery using the da Vinci single-port robotic surgical system was performed on 115 patients between November 2020 and June 2023. Patient characteristics, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The type of surgeries included thymectomy, mediastinal mass excision, anatomical pulmonary resection (including lobectomy and segmentectomy), esophagectomy, and enucleation of esophageal submucosal tumors in 41, 13, 54, 5, and 2 patients, respectively. The mean total operative time and chest tube duration for different procedures were as follows: thymectomy, 152.9. ± 6.7 minutes and 1.2 ± 0.5 days; mediastinal mass excision, 93.3 ± 26.5 minutes and 1.0 ± 0 days; anatomical pulmonary resection, 187.2 ± 55.8 minutes and 2.5 ± 1.5 days; esophagectomy, 485 ± 111.9 minutes and 12 ± 4.6 days; and enucleation of esophageal submucosal tumors, 170 ± 30 minutes and 5.5 ± 0.5 days, respectively. Conversion to a thoracotomy or sternotomy was not required. Conversion to video-assisted thoracic surgery occurred in 1 patient, and an additional port was applied in 2 patients. Two patients experienced postoperative complications greater than grade IIIa.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic thoracic surgery using the da Vinci single-port robotic surgical system is feasible and safe in various fields of thoracic surgery, including complex procedures such as anatomical pulmonary resection and esophagectomy. More complex thoracic surgeries can be performed with the continuous advancement and innovation of instruments in robotic systems.

Randomized controlled trials in lung cancer surgery: How are we doing?

Objective

Randomized control trials are considered the highest level of evidence, yet the scalability and practicality of implementing randomized control trials in the thoracic surgical oncology space are not well described. The aim of this study is to understand what types of randomized control trials have been conducted in thoracic surgical oncology and ascertain their success rate in completing them as originally planned.

Methods

The ClinicalTrials.gov database was queried in April 2023 to identify registered randomized control trials performed in patients with lung cancer who underwent surgery (by any technique) as part of their treatment.

Results

There were 68 eligible randomized control trials; 33 (48.5%) were intended to examine different perioperative patient management strategies (eg, analgesia, ventilation, drainage) or to examine different intraoperative technical aspects (eg, stapling, number of ports, port placement, ligation). The number of randomized control trials was relatively stable over time until a large increase in randomized control trials starting in 2016. Forty-four of the randomized control trials (64.7%) were open-label studies, 43 (63.2%) were conducted in a single facility, 66 (97.1%) had 2 arms, and the mean number of patients enrolled per randomized control trial was 236 (SD, 187). Of 21 completed randomized control trials (31%), the average time to complete accrual was 1605 days (4.4 years) and average time to complete primary/secondary outcomes and adverse events collection was 2125 days (5.82 years).

Conclusions

Given the immense investment of resources that randomized control trials require, these findings suggest the need to scrutinize future randomized control trial proposals to assess the likelihood of successful completion. Future study is needed to understand the various contributing factors to randomized control trial success or failure.

Perioperative outcomes of bi-pigtail catheter drainage strategy versus conventional chest tube after uniportal video-assisted thoracic lung surgery

OBJECTIVES

Chest tube (CT) drainage is a main cause of postoperative pain in lung surgery. Here, we introduced a novel drainage strategy with bi-pigtail catheters (PCs) and conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare with conventional CT drainage after uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lung surgery.

METHODS

A single-centre, prospective, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial (ChiCTR2000035337) was conducted with a preplanned sample size of 396. The primary outcome was the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes included other indicators of postoperative pain, drainage volume, duration of drainage, postoperative hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications, CT reinsertion and medical costs.

RESULTS

A total number of 396 patients were randomized between August 2020 and January 2021, 387 of whom were included in the final analysis. The baseline and clinical characteristics of the patients were well balanced between 2 groups. The NPRS on the first postoperative day was significantly lower in the PC group than in the CT group (2.40 ± 1.27 vs 3.02 ± 1.39, p < 0.001), as well as the second/third-day NPRS, the incidence of sudden severe pain (9/192, 4.7% vs 34/195, 17.4%, P < 0.001) and pain requiring intervention (19/192, 9.9% vs 46/195, 23.6%, P < 0.001). In addition, the medical cost in the PC group was lower (US$7809 ± 1646 vs US$8205 ± 1815, P = 0.025). Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed that the drainage strategy was the only factor influencing the incidence of pain requiring intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The drainage strategy with bi-PCs in patients undergoing uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lung surgery alleviates postoperative pain with adequate safety and efficacy.

Experiences of novel cotton device for uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: CS Two-Way HandleTM

In Japan, cotton is commonly used in thoracic surgery for the gentle handling of organs as well as obtaining a good surgical field. While uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is being recognized as a major surgical approach, use of cotton is not noted in this technique. Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery needs curved instruments because they are effective in preventing the interference of instruments. Thus, we developed a novel curved cotton instrument, known as the "CS Two-Way HandleTM", for uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. The CS Two-Way HandleTM can be used not only as a cotton bar but also as a suction aid. Moreover, surgical smoke can be suctioned with the insertion of cotton. This instrument was introduced in our institution in September 2019, along with some other prototypes. When anatomical lung resection using uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery was first introduced, there were some instances of conversion to conventional multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. However, after the CS Two-Way HandleTM introduction, the procedure has become easy to perform and the need for conversion to conventional methods has reduced. The main uses of the CS Two-Way HandleTM are: (I) exposure of the surgical view, (II) lymph node dissection, (III) bleeding control, (IV) suction, and (V) evacuation of surgical smoke. We present our experiences using the CS Two-Way HandleTM in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.