Abstract
Our goal was to assess the safety, feasibility and oncological outcomes of non-intubated thoracoscopic lobectomies for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A comprehensive search was performed in EMBASE (via Ovid), MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Cochrane CENTRAL from January 2004 to March 2020. Studies comparing non-intubated anaesthesia with intubated anaesthesia for thoracoscopic lobectomy for NSCLC were included. An exploratory systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed by combining the reported outcomes of the individual studies using a random effects model. For dichotomous outcomes, risk ratios were calculated and for continuous outcomes, the mean difference was used. Three retrospective cohort studies were included, with a total of 204 patients. The comparison between non-intubated and intubated patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy showed no statistically significant differences in postoperative complication rates [risk ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36–1.16; P = 0.30; I2 = 17%], operating times (mean difference −12.40, 95% CI −28.57 to 3.77; P = 0.15; I2 = 48%), length of hospital stay (mean difference −1.13, 95% CI −2.32 to 0.05; P = 0.90; I2 = 0%) and number of dissected lymph nodes (risk ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.78–1.25; P = 0.46; I2 = 0%). Despite the limitation of only 3 papers included, awake and intubated thoracoscopic lobectomies for resectable NSCLC seem to have comparable perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Nevertheless, the oncological implications of the non-intubated approach should be considered. The long-term benefits for patients with lung cancer need to be carefully assessed.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer
