Techniques of protection and revascularization of the bronchial anastomosis

Use of Octopus™ Tissue Stabilizer for Minimal Manipulation Approach of Bronchial Anastomosis in Lung Transplant

Bronchial anastomotic complications are a cause of grave concern for surgeons that perform lung transplantations. There are several risk factors that may lead to this complication, being inadequate surgical technique one of them, specifically regarding adequate exposure and manipulation of the bronchial stump and anastomosis. Here we report the use of Octopus™ Tissue Stabilizer as a mean to allow for a better exposure of the stump and facilitate a "no-touch" approach towards anastomosis. Systematic application of devices that facilitate the employment of the correct surgical techniques can have an effect in reducing the incidence of bronchial anastomotic complications.

Double sleeve resections

Double sleeve lung resections are complex surgical procedures that require specialized surgical expertise and careful patient selection. These procedures allow for the preservation of lung tissue while still achieving complete tumor resection for central tumors. Although initially considered high-risk operations, double sleeve lung resections have become a viable option for central tumors. Recent studies have shown that double sleeve lung resections are associated with lower morbidity and mortality rates than pneumonectomy. Furthermore, double sleeve lung resections may be associated with similar or even better long-term oncological outcomes compared to pneumonectomy, with the added benefit of preserving lung parenchyma and reducing the incidence of postoperative complications.

Standard and extended sleeve resections of the tracheobronchial tree

Anatomic resections with bronchial and/or vascular resections and reconstruction, so called sleeve resections were originally performed in patients with impaired cardio-pulmonary reserves. Nowadays, sleeve resections are established surgical procedures of first choice for tracheobronchial pathologies, whenever anatomically and oncologically feasible. Experienced thoracic surgeons have a broad surgical armentarium to avoid a pneumonectomy and the morbidity and mortality associated with it. Sleeve resections are associated with better outcomes in all aspects. Thus, sleeve resection is not an alternative for pneumonectomy and vice versa. In this review article we set out to provide a contemporary overview on this topic.

For non-small cell lung cancer with T3 (central) disease, sleeve lobectomy or pneumonectomy?

BACKGROUND

Pneumonectomy (PN) has traditionally been the treatment of choice for central lung tumors for which the alternative is sleeve lobectomy (SL). The aim of this study was to compare early and long-term results after SL and PN in focusing on T3 central non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent SL (n=58) or PN (n=42) were retrospectively analyzed. For bias reduction, these 100 patients had been selected according to the following criteria: (I) tumor located in the main bronchus less than 2 cm distal to the carina; (II) there were no N2 disease; (III) no induction therapy was applied; (IV) complete resection (R0) was achieved.

RESULTS

SL and PN patients had comparable mean ages, gender distribution, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), stage and tumor grade. Postoperative mortality (3.4% vs. 4.8%, P=1.0) and morbidity (41% vs. 38%, P=0.74) were similar between the two groups. Recurrences occurred in 48% of patients after SL and in 31% of those after PN (P=0.08). The 5-year survival after SL (64.8%) and PN (61.4%) was not significantly different (P=0.20). Multivariable survival analysis showed that there were no independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

SL does not compromise survival for NSCLC with T3 central disease compared with PN. It is an adequate oncologic resection and should be treated as the first line intervention whenever complete resection can be achieved.