Cargando…

Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Single or combined basal segmentectomy (CBS), excluding common basal segmentectomy, is the most difficult of all types of segmentectomies. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and oncological prognosis between uniport thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy (UTBS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dai, Zhangyi, Li, Yiming, Mi, Xingqi, Yang, Zhenyu, Gao, Jiayi, Liu, Chengwu, Mei, Jiandong, Liu, Lunxu, Pu, Qiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10482630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37691649
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-23-477
_version_ 1785102213308219392
author Dai, Zhangyi
Li, Yiming
Mi, Xingqi
Yang, Zhenyu
Gao, Jiayi
Liu, Chengwu
Mei, Jiandong
Liu, Lunxu
Pu, Qiang
author_facet Dai, Zhangyi
Li, Yiming
Mi, Xingqi
Yang, Zhenyu
Gao, Jiayi
Liu, Chengwu
Mei, Jiandong
Liu, Lunxu
Pu, Qiang
author_sort Dai, Zhangyi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Single or combined basal segmentectomy (CBS), excluding common basal segmentectomy, is the most difficult of all types of segmentectomies. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and oncological prognosis between uniport thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy (UTBS) and triport thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy (TTBS). METHODS: This study retrospectively collected 300 patients who underwent thoracoscopic single or CBS at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University from April 2015 to May 2022, including 67 and 233 patients in the UTBS and TTBS groups, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce confounding bias between the two groups. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: After PSM, the UTBS group (n=64) had significantly less intraoperative blood loss than the TTBS group (n=64) (20 vs. 30 mL, P=0.001). Other perioperative outcomes, including the operation time, number of lymph nodes and lymph node stations harvested, duration of chest tube drainage, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications, were comparable. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the operative time in the group underwent single basal segmentectomy (SBS) was significantly shorter compared to the group underwent CBS (110 vs. 120 min, P=0.002). There were 5 cases of recurrence in the overall cohort and no recurrence in the matched cohort. No deaths were observed in the overall cohort. Therefore, a survival analysis was conducted only for RFS in the overall cohort. The RFS rate and OS rate of the overall cohort were 98.3% and 100%, respectively. The surgical approach (UTBS vs. TTBS) was not an independent risk factor for RFS (HR: 1.120, 95% CI: 0.342–13.051, P=0.879). CONCLUSIONS: UTBS provided similar perioperative outcomes and oncological prognoses compared to TTBS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10482630
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104826302023-09-08 Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer Dai, Zhangyi Li, Yiming Mi, Xingqi Yang, Zhenyu Gao, Jiayi Liu, Chengwu Mei, Jiandong Liu, Lunxu Pu, Qiang J Thorac Dis Original Article BACKGROUND: Single or combined basal segmentectomy (CBS), excluding common basal segmentectomy, is the most difficult of all types of segmentectomies. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and oncological prognosis between uniport thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy (UTBS) and triport thoracoscopic basal segmentectomy (TTBS). METHODS: This study retrospectively collected 300 patients who underwent thoracoscopic single or CBS at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University from April 2015 to May 2022, including 67 and 233 patients in the UTBS and TTBS groups, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce confounding bias between the two groups. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: After PSM, the UTBS group (n=64) had significantly less intraoperative blood loss than the TTBS group (n=64) (20 vs. 30 mL, P=0.001). Other perioperative outcomes, including the operation time, number of lymph nodes and lymph node stations harvested, duration of chest tube drainage, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications, were comparable. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the operative time in the group underwent single basal segmentectomy (SBS) was significantly shorter compared to the group underwent CBS (110 vs. 120 min, P=0.002). There were 5 cases of recurrence in the overall cohort and no recurrence in the matched cohort. No deaths were observed in the overall cohort. Therefore, a survival analysis was conducted only for RFS in the overall cohort. The RFS rate and OS rate of the overall cohort were 98.3% and 100%, respectively. The surgical approach (UTBS vs. TTBS) was not an independent risk factor for RFS (HR: 1.120, 95% CI: 0.342–13.051, P=0.879). CONCLUSIONS: UTBS provided similar perioperative outcomes and oncological prognoses compared to TTBS. AME Publishing Company 2023-08-14 2023-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10482630/ /pubmed/37691649 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-23-477 Text en 2023 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Dai, Zhangyi
Li, Yiming
Mi, Xingqi
Yang, Zhenyu
Gao, Jiayi
Liu, Chengwu
Mei, Jiandong
Liu, Lunxu
Pu, Qiang
Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title_full Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title_fullStr Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title_short Comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage IA lung cancer
title_sort comparison of uniport versus triport thoracoscopic single or combined basal segmentectomy for stage ia lung cancer
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10482630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37691649
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-23-477
work_keys_str_mv AT daizhangyi comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT liyiming comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT mixingqi comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT yangzhenyu comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT gaojiayi comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT liuchengwu comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT meijiandong comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT liulunxu comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer
AT puqiang comparisonofuniportversustriportthoracoscopicsingleorcombinedbasalsegmentectomyforstageialungcancer