Zahid Imran, Routledge Tom, Billè Andrea, Scarci Marco
Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, and Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy's Hospital, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011 Feb;12(2):260-4. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2010.254706. Epub 2010 Nov 18.
A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether an open surgical approach is superior to minimally invasive surgery in patients with postpneumonectomy empyema (PPE). Overall 171 papers were found using the reported search, of which 12 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results are tabulated. We conclude that open surgical approaches are superior to minimally invasive surgery in terms of empyema recurrence rate, mortality and reintervention rate. Minimally invasive surgery includes chest tube drainage with or without chemical irrigation and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery debridement. Whereas open surgery includes open debridement, open window thoracostomy (OWT) and thoracomyoplasty. To allow for an accurate comparison, success of an intervention was defined as prevention of empyema recurrence. Two studies reported surgical outcomes of patients treated with minimally invasive treatment options. They found high mortality rates (17.1%) and low success rates (31%) in patients treated by chest tube drainage with chemical irrigation. Five studies treated PPE using a combination of minimally invasive and open surgical approaches and reported a high reintervention rate of 3.5 (range 3-5) and an empyema recurrence rate of 13.3%. Higher success rates (6.7 vs. 95%), lower mortality rates (33 vs. 0%) and shorter hospital stay (47.5 vs. 17.6 days) were all noted with thoracomyoplasty compared to chest tube drainage therapy. Five studies managed PPE using OWT or thoracomyoplasty. The time between empyema diagnosis to resolution (3 vs. 38 months) was much shorter with immediate OWT than with delayed OWT therapy. The Clagett procedure resulted in a mean hospital stay of 12.9 days, an operative mortality rate of 7.1% and an overall success rate of 81%. Thoracomyoplasty led to a mean hospital stay of 34 days with a mortality rate of 6%. The shorter hospital stay, lower empyema recurrence rates and lower mortality rates may make open surgical approaches a more effective treatment option to minimally invasive options.
根据结构化方案撰写了一篇胸外科最佳证据主题。所探讨的问题是,在肺切除术后脓胸(PPE)患者中,开放手术方法是否优于微创手术。通过报告的检索共找到171篇论文,其中12篇代表回答该临床问题的最佳证据。现将作者、期刊、出版日期和国家、所研究的患者组、研究类型、相关结局和结果制成表格。我们得出结论,就脓胸复发率、死亡率和再次干预率而言,开放手术方法优于微创手术。微创手术包括带或不带化学冲洗的胸腔闭式引流以及电视辅助胸腔镜手术清创术。而开放手术包括开放清创术、开窗胸廓造口术(OWT)和胸廓成形术。为了进行准确比较,将干预的成功定义为预防脓胸复发。两项研究报告了接受微创治疗方案的患者的手术结局。他们发现,接受化学冲洗胸腔闭式引流治疗的患者死亡率高(17.1%)且成功率低(31%)。五项研究采用微创和开放手术方法相结合的方式治疗PPE,报告再次干预率高达3.5(范围3 - 5),脓胸复发率为13.3%。与胸腔闭式引流治疗相比,胸廓成形术的成功率更高(6.7%对95%)、死亡率更低(33%对0%)且住院时间更短(47.5天对17.6天)。五项研究采用OWT或胸廓成形术治疗PPE。即刻OWT治疗从脓胸诊断到治愈的时间(3个月对38个月)比延迟OWT治疗短得多。Clagett手术的平均住院时间为12.9天,手术死亡率为7.1%,总体成功率为81%。胸廓成形术导致平均住院时间为34天,死亡率为6%。住院时间更短、脓胸复发率更低和死亡率更低可能使开放手术方法成为比微创方法更有效的治疗选择。