Indications for conversion of thoracoscopic to open thoracotomy in video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy
Department of Thoracic Surgery, People's Hospital of Peking University, Beijing, China. ANZ Journal of Surgery
(Impact Factor: 1.12).
04/2012; 82(4):245-50. DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2011.05997.x
BACKGROUD: The study aims to discuss indications for conversion to thoracotomy in completely thoracoscopic lobectomy.
From September 2006 to April 2010, 306 patients (164 men, 142 women, median age 58.1 years, range 15 to 86 years) underwent completely thoracoscopic lobectomy. There were 223 cases of primary lung cancer, 11 other malignant diseases and 72 cases of benign disease. The steps of the thoracoscopic procedures are almost identical to those of traditional open lobectomy, which requires standard mediastinal lymph node dissection for primary lung cancer patients. When conversion to an open procedure is necessary, such as in the presence of lymph node adhesions or metastases and bleeding, operative incisions are extended 12-15 cm towards lower angle of the scapula, retractors are used to separate the ribs, and the procedure is completely under direct visualization.
All procedures were performed without significant complications or intraoperative deaths. The average surgical duration was 195 min, and average blood loss was 256 mL with no blood transfusions required. The average chest tube drainage duration was 7.45 days. The average post-operative hospital stay was 10.34 days. There were 27 cases (8.8%) of conversion to open thoracotomy, for the reasons of interference by lymph nodes (n = 18), bleeding (n = 4), inflammatory adhesions of arteries (n = 3) and large size tumours (n = 2).
Adhesions or lymph node metastases and bleeding were the most important causes of conversion to thoracotomy in completely thoracoscopic lobectomy. Large tumours, fused fissures and dense pleural adhesions can always be managed thoracoscopically.
Available from: Kaustav Majumder
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To study causes and implications of intraoperative conversion to thoracotomy during video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy.
We performed an institutional review of patients undergoing lobectomy for known or suspected lung cancer with root cause analysis of every conversion from VATS to open thoracotomy.
Between 2004 and 2012, 1227 patients underwent lobectomy. Of these, 517 procedures (42%) were completed via VATS, 87 procedures (7%) were converted to open procedures, and 623 procedures (51%) were performed via planned thoracotomy. Patients undergoing thoracotomy were younger and had a higher incidence of prior lung cancers. Planned thoracotomy and conversion group patients had higher clinical T stage than patients in the VATS group, whereas the planned thoracotomy group had higher pathologic stage than patients in the other groups. Postoperative complications were more frequent in patients in the conversion group (46%) than in the VATS group (23%; P < .001), but similar to the open group (42%; P = .56). Validating a previous classification of causes for conversion, 22 out of 87 conversions (25%) were due to vascular causes, 56 conversions (64%) were for anatomy (eg, adhesions or tumor size), and 8 conversions (9%) were the result of lymph nodes. No specific imaging variables predicted conversion. Within the conversion groups, emergent (20 out of 87; 23%) and planned (67 out of 87; 77%) conversion groups were similar in patient and tumor characteristics and incidence of perioperative morbidity. The conversion rate for VATS lobectomy dropped from 21 out of 74 (28%), to 29 out of 194 (15%), to 37 out of 336 (11%) (P < .001) over 3-year intervals. Over the same periods, the proportion of operations started via VATS increased significantly.
With increasing experience, a higher proportion of lobectomy operations can be completed thoracoscopically. VATS should be strongly considered as the initial approach for the majority of patients undergoing lobectomy.
Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Available from: Chun Sung Byun
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Since anatomical lung resection by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) was first introduced, VATS has played a major role in lung cancer. However, conversion to thoracotomy is a major concern because an unexpected thoracotomy increases the risk of potentially adverse outcomes. Therefore, we compared patients who were and were not converted to thoracotomy and identified the risk factors for thoracotomy conversion.
Between January 2005 and December 2013, 69 of 1,110 VATS lobectomies for lung cancer required an unexpected conversion to thoracotomy. Each converted patient was individually matched to 3 randomly selected nonconverted patients based on date of operation, type of operation, and pathologic stage.
The most common cause of conversion was fibrocalcified lymph nodes, found in 28 patients (40.6%), followed by vascular injury in 20, tumor invasion or extension in 11, pleural adhesion in 5, incomplete interlobar fissure in 3, and failure of single-lung ventilation in 2. The differences in overall postoperative complications and in-hospital deaths were not significant; however, respiratory complications were significantly more common in the conversion group (p = 0.012). The independent risk factors for conversion were age 65 years and older, forced expiratory volume in 1 second of less than 1.8 L, and the presence of fibrocalcified lymph nodes on preoperative chest computed tomography.
Unexpected conversion to thoracotomy during VATS lobectomy in lung cancer does not appear to increase overall surgical morbidity and mortality. However, with high-risk patients, the surgeon requires careful selection for VATS candidate. Also, if necessary, the decision to convert must be made promptly to reduce possible critical respiratory complications.
Copyright © 2015 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.