Cargando…

No-waiting segmentectomy: an optimized approach for segmentectomy

BACKGROUND: Currently, modified inflation–deflation is considered the easiest way to identify the intersegmental plane during pulmonary segmentectomy. However, this approach requires a wait of about 10–20 min during the operative procedure. Therefore, we optimized the procedure, which we call no-wai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Changchun, Cai, Lei, Chen, Qian, Xu, Xiaofang, Liang, Jinxiao, Mao, Weimin, Chen, Qixun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33717551
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd-20-2661
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Currently, modified inflation–deflation is considered the easiest way to identify the intersegmental plane during pulmonary segmentectomy. However, this approach requires a wait of about 10–20 min during the operative procedure. Therefore, we optimized the procedure, which we call no-waiting segmentectomy. In this study, we compared no-waiting segmentectomy with the modified inflation–deflation method. METHODS: We studied 123 consecutive patients with pulmonary ground-glass nodules who underwent segmentectomy by uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in a single medical group from January 2019 to April 2020. Forty-five patients underwent the modified inflation–deflation method and 78 patients underwent the no-waiting method. The no-waiting procedure involved severing of the target segmental pulmonary artery, inflating the lung with atmospheric air, dissecting the hilum, and dividing the target segmental bronchus. The entire procedure could be performed at a stretch and no pause was needed. We compared the two methods for surgery time, bleeding volume, drainage time, and postoperative hospital stay. Propensity-score matching was used to adjust the baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Thirty-three pairs of 123 patients were successfully matched. Before propensity-score matching, there was no difference between the two methods in terms of surgery time, bleeding volume, drainage time, and postoperative hospital stay. After propensity-score matching, the surgery time in the no-waiting group was significantly shorter than that in the modified inflation–deflation method group (80.12±35.53 vs. 102.97±48.07 min, P=0.03). There was no difference between the two methods in terms of bleeding volume, drainage time, and postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: No-waiting segmentectomy was associated with a reduced surgery time, compared to that associated with modified inflation–deflation segmentectomy. Furthermore, no-waiting segmentectomy did not increase bleeding volume, drainage time, and postoperative hospital stay. Thus, no-waiting segmentectomy is an optional optimized approach for segmentectomy.