Vaughan Paul, Oey Inger, Nakas Apostolos, Martin-Ucar Antonio, Edwards John, Waller David
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, United Kingdom.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Mar;31(3):486-90; discussion 490. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.11.052. Epub 2007 Jan 12.
The feasibility of performing a standard lobectomy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and severe heterogeneous emphysema whose respiratory reserve is outside standard operability guidelines has been described [Edwards JG, Duthie DJR, Waller DA. Lobar volume reduction surgery: a method of increasing the lung cancer resection rate in patients with emphysema. Thorax 2001;56:791-5; Korst RJ, Ginsberg RJ, Ailawadi M, Bains MS, Downey RJ, Rusch V, Stover D. Lobectomy improves ventilatory function in selected patients with severe COPD. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:898-902; Carretta A, Zannini P, Puglisi A, Chiesa G, Vanzulli A, Bianchi A, Fumagalli A, Bianco S. Improvement in pulmonary function after lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer in emphysematous patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999;15(5):602-7]. Postoperative lung function was better than predicted, attributable to the therapeutic benefit of deflation of the hemithorax. Our aim was to determine whether the physiological benefits of this approach were superior to conventional non-anatomical lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) in similar patients.
A retrospective review of a single surgeon's experience identified 34 consecutive patients who underwent upper lobectomy for completely resected stage I-II NSCLC, and who had severe heterogeneous emphysema of apical distribution with a predicted postoperative FEV1 of less than 40%. Their perioperative characteristics, postoperative spirometry and survival of these cases were compared to 46 similar patients who underwent unilateral upper lobe LVRS during the same period.
Data expressed as median (range). LVRS patients were significantly younger (59 years [39-70] vs 67 years [48-79] p<0.001), with more severe airflow obstruction (FEV(1) %pred 24 [12-60] vs 44 [17-54] p<0.001) and more heterogenous disease ('Q' score 4 [0.5-11.5] vs 7 [1-13] p=0.001) than the lobectomy group. No significant difference was found in median survival (88 vs 53 months, p=0.06). Lobectomy patients had a shorter air leak duration (5 days [2-36] vs 9 days [1-40], p=0.02) and hospital stay (8 days [3-63] vs 13 days [6-90] p=0.01). A significant correlation was found between pre-operative Q score and percentage improvement in FEV1 (r=-0.33, p=0.02).
Lobectomy for lung cancer in patients in severe heterogenous chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is associated with similar improvement in airflow obstruction as conventional LVRS, but is associated with a shorter postoperative course. Lobectomy may therefore offer a therapeutic alternative to conventional LVRS in a selected population.
已有研究描述了在呼吸储备超出标准可手术性指南的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)合并严重异质性肺气肿患者中实施标准肺叶切除术的可行性[爱德华兹 JG、达西 DJR、沃勒 DA。肺叶容积缩小手术:一种提高肺气肿患者肺癌切除率的方法。《胸腔》2001 年;56:791 - 5;科斯特 RJ、金斯伯格 RJ、艾拉瓦迪 M、贝恩斯 MS、唐尼 RJ、鲁施 V、斯托弗 D。肺叶切除术可改善部分重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的通气功能。《胸外科年鉴》1998 年;66:898 - 902;卡雷塔 A、赞尼尼 P、普格利西 A、基耶萨 G、万祖利 A、比安基 A、富马加利 A、比安科 S。肺气肿患者非小细胞肺癌肺叶切除术后肺功能的改善。《欧洲心胸外科杂志》1999 年;15(5):602 - 7]。术后肺功能优于预期,这归因于半侧胸廓萎陷的治疗益处。我们的目的是确定在类似患者中,这种方法的生理益处是否优于传统的非解剖性肺容积缩小手术(LVRS)。
对一位外科医生的经验进行回顾性研究,确定了 34 例连续接受上叶切除术以完全切除 I - II 期 NSCLC 的患者,这些患者患有严重的尖段分布异质性肺气肿,预计术后第 1 秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)小于 40%。将这些病例的围手术期特征、术后肺量计检查结果和生存率与同期接受单侧上叶 LVRS 的 46 例类似患者进行比较。
数据以中位数(范围)表示。LVRS 组患者明显更年轻(59 岁[39 - 70] vs 67 岁[48 - 79],p < 0.001),气流阻塞更严重(FEV(1) %预计值 24 [l2 - 60] vs 44 [17 - 54],p < 0.001),且疾病异质性更高(“Q”评分 4 [0.5 - 11.5] vs 7 [1 - l3] p = 0.001),与肺叶切除术组相比。中位生存期无显著差异(88 个月 vs 53 个月,p = 0.06)。肺叶切除术患者的漏气持续时间更短(5 天[2 - 36] vs 9 天[1 - 40],p = 0.02),住院时间更短(8 天[3 - 63] vs 13 天[6 - 90],p = 0.01)。术前 Q 评分与 FEV1 改善百分比之间存在显著相关性(r = -0.33,p = 0.02)。
在重度异质性慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者中,肺癌肺叶切除术与传统 LVRS 在改善气流阻塞方面效果相似,但术后病程更短。因此,在特定人群中,肺叶切除术可能是传统 LVRS 的一种治疗替代方法。