When Is It Safe to Operate for Lung Cancer? Selection of Fiscally Responsible Cardiopulmonary Function Tests for Limited Resection (Wedge Resection and Segmentectomy), Standard Lobectomy, Sleeve Lobectomy, and Pneumonectomy

Author(s):  
Travis C. Geraci ◽  
Thomas Ng
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua A. Scheinerman ◽  
Jeffrey Jiang ◽  
Stephanie H. Chang ◽  
Travis C. Geraci ◽  
Robert J. Cerfolio

While lung cancer remains the most common cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States, surgery for curative intent continues to be a mainstay of therapy. The robotic platform for pulmonary resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been utilized for more than a decade now. With respect to more localized resections, such as wedge resection or lobectomy, considerable data exist demonstrating shorter length of stay, decreased postoperative pain, improved lymph node dissection, and overall lower complication rate. There are a multitude of technical advantages the robotic approach offers, such as improved optics, natural movement of the operator's hands to control the instruments, and precise identification of tissue planes leading to a more ergonomic and safe dissection. Due to the advantages, the scope of robotic resections is expanding. In this review, we will look at the existing data on extended robotic pulmonary resections, specifically post-induction therapy resection, sleeve lobectomy, and pneumonectomy. Additionally, this review will examine the indications for these more complex resections, as well as review the data and outcomes from other institutions' experience with performing them. Lastly, we will share the strategy and outlook of our own institution with respect to these three types of extended pulmonary resections. Though some controversy remains regarding the use and safety of robotic surgery in these complex pulmonary resections, we hope to shed some light on the existing evidence and evaluate the efficacy and safety for patients with NSCLC.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (30) ◽  
pp. 3447-3453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajwanth R. Veluswamy ◽  
Nicole Ezer ◽  
Grace Mhango ◽  
Emily Goodman ◽  
Marcelo Bonomi ◽  
...  

Purpose Limited resection has been increasingly used in older patients with stage IA lung cancer. However, the equivalency of limited resection versus lobectomy according to histology is unknown. Methods We identified patients older than 65 years with stage IA invasive adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma ≤ 2 cm who were treated with limited resection (wedge or segmentectomy) or lobectomy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare database. We estimated propensity scores that predicted the use of limited resection and compared survival of patients treated with limited resection versus lobectomy. Treatments were considered equivalent if the upper 95th percentile of the hazard ratio (HR) for limited resection was ≤ 1.25. Results Overall, 27% of 2,008 patients with adenocarcinoma and 32% of 1,139 patients with squamous cell carcinoma underwent limited resection. Survival analyses, adjusted for propensity score by using inverse probability weighting, showed that limited resection was not equivalent to lobectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma (HR, 1.21; upper 95% CI,1.34) or squamous cell carcinoma (HR, 1.21; upper 95% CI, 1.39). Although patients with adenocarcinomas treated with segmentectomy had equivalent survival rates to those treated with lobectomy (HR, 0.97; upper 95% CI, 1.07), outcomes of those treated with wedge resection (HR, 1.29; upper 95% CI, 1.42) did not. Among patients with squamous cell carcinoma, neither wedge resection (HR, 1.34; upper 95% CI, 1.53) nor segmentectomy (HR, 1.19; upper 95% CI, 1.36) were equivalent to lobectomy. Conclusion We found generally that limited resection is not equivalent to lobectomy in older patients with invasive non–small-cell lung cancer ≤ 2 cm in size, although segmentectomy may be equivalent in patients with adenocarcinoma.


2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (7) ◽  
pp. 1004-1010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masayoshi Inoue ◽  
Masato Minami ◽  
Noriyoshi Sawabata ◽  
Yoshihisa Kadota ◽  
Yasushi Shintani ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 743-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volkan Baysungur ◽  
Erdal Okur ◽  
Leyla Tuncer ◽  
Semih Halezeroglu

2017 ◽  
Vol 154 (2) ◽  
pp. 675-686.e4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Babatunde A. Yerokun ◽  
Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang ◽  
Brian C. Gulack ◽  
Xuechan Li ◽  
Michael S. Mulvihill ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document