scholarly journals Vein-first versus artery-first ligation procedure for lung cancer surgery: An updated review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tian Zhao ◽  
Chu Zhang ◽  
Chen Zhao ◽  
Wenbin Wu ◽  
Miao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pulmonary Vessel ◽  
Tumor Dissemination ◽  
Recurrence Risk Ratio ◽  
Artery First

Abstract Background The optimal sequence of pulmonary vessel interruption during lung cancer resection remains controversial. This review aimed to elucidate the association of vein-first versus artery-first ligation and circulation tumor cells (CTCs) dissemination and survival of the patients. Methods We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to October 2020 for published articles that compared vein-first (the pulmonary vein was interrupted first) and artery-first procedure (the pulmonary artery was ligated first) during lung cancer surgery. Results Finally, a total of 13 full articles were included. First, 7 of these studies with survival data were included for meta-analysis. As compared with artery-first ligation, vein-first approach did not decrease local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 0.96 in favour of vein-first ligation; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77–1.19, p = 0.68) or distant metastasis (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.34–2.54, p = 0.89), but it was associated with better 5-year overall survival of the patients (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52–0.99, p = 0.04). Second, 7 studies provided the data of tumor cells using different biomarkers and detection methods; thus, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible. Among them, 3 studies showed that vein-first decreased the extent of tumor dissemination. Conclusion Vein-first ligation in lung cancer surgery is associated with improved survival of the patients and potentially decreased surgery-related tumor dissemination. Further high-quality trials are warranted.

scholarly journals Vein-first versus artery-first ligation procedure for lung cancer surgery: An updated review

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tian Zhao ◽  
Chu Zhang ◽  
Chen Zhao ◽  
Wen-Bin Wu ◽  
Miao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Pulmonary Vessel ◽  
Tumor Dissemination ◽  
Recurrence Risk Ratio ◽  
Artery First

Abstract Background The optimal sequence of pulmonary vessel interruption during lung cancer resection remains controversial. This review aimed to elucidate the association of vein-first versus artery-first ligation and survival of the patients. Methods We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to September 2021 for published articles that compared vein-first (the pulmonary vein was interrupted first) and artery-first procedure (the pulmonary artery was ligated first) during lung cancer surgery. Results Finally, a total of 13 full articles were obtained. First, 7 studies with survival information were included for meta-analyses. As compared with the artery-first ligation, vein-first approach did not decrease the risk of local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 0.92 in favour of vein-first; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61–1.39, p = 0.68) or distant metastasis (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.30–2.85, p = 0.89); but it was associated with better disease-free survival (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.37–0.73, p < 0.01) as well as 5-year overall survival (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.41–0.86, p < 0.01). In addition, the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total complications, and length of postoperative stay were mainly comparable between the two groups. Second, 7 studies provided the data of tumor cells indicated by different biomarkers and detection methods; and 3 of these reports showed that vein-first ligation decreased the extent of intraoperative tumor dissemination. However, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity. Conclusion Vein-first ligation in lung cancer surgery may be associated with improved survival of the patients, which might be ascribed to potentially lower risk of tumor cell dissemination. Well-designed, large-scale trials are warranted to clarify these occasional findings.

Detection of circulating tumor cells in peripheral blood of patients who underwent lung cancer surgery

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7564-7564
Author(s):  
T. Hirata ◽  
K. Takenaka ◽  
E. Nakayama ◽  
M. Sonobe ◽  
F. Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
Circulating Tumor Cells ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cancer Surgery

scholarly journals Does lung cancer surgery cause circulating tumor cells?—A multicenter, prospective study

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2419-2426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noriyuki Matsutani ◽  
Noriyoshi Sawabata ◽  
Masafumi Yamaguchi ◽  
Tetsukan Woo ◽  
Yujin Kudo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
Circulating Tumor Cells ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Study

scholarly journals Role of circulating tumor cells in diagnosis of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 030006052199492
Author(s):  
Qingtao Zhao ◽  
Zheng Yuan ◽  
Huien Wang ◽  
Hua Zhang ◽  
Guochen Duan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
Circulating Tumor Cells ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
True Negative ◽  
Clinical Determination

Objective We systematically reviewed the literature relating to the diagnostic accuracy of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) for the clinical determination of lung cancer. Methods This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CTCs for the clinical determination of lung cancer. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant studies up to 31 May 2020. The numbers of patients with true positive, false positive, false negative, and true negative results were extracted from each individual study. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve values were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Twenty-one studies with 3997 subjects met the inclusion criteria. The overall diagnostic accuracy was assessed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 (95%CI: 0.65–0.79) and 0.96 (95%CI: 0.91–0.98), respectively, and the pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were 16.86 (95%CI: 7.65–37.12) and 0.29 (95%CI: 0.23–0.37), respectively. The combined diagnostic odds ratio was 58.12 (95%CI: 24.82–136.09). Conclusion This meta-analysis indicated that CTCs had good diagnostic value for detecting lung cancer.

scholarly journals Gravity Drainage Versus Forced Suction Drainage for Patients With Excess Fluid in Pleural or Peritoneal Spaces

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Li ◽  
Charlene Argáez
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Chest Tube ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Gravity Drainage ◽  
Chest Drainage ◽  
Tube Drainage ◽  
Randomized Controlled

The evidence for chest drainage with gravity compared with forced suction was mixed. Two randomized controlled trials included in 2 systematic reviews with meta-analysis suggested that there is no difference between chest drainage with gravity versus forced suction regarding the risk of prolonged air leak, or post-operative pneumothorax and the duration of chest tube drainage, or hospital stay, following lung cancer surgery. However, 1 randomized controlled trial included in a systematic review with meta-analysis suggested that chest drainage with gravity resulted in a shorter duration of chest tube drainage and hospital stay compared to forced suction following lung cancer surgery. One guideline suggests that chest drainage with forced suction does not provide additional benefits for patients undergoing lung surgery compared to gravity drainage. There is a lack of relevant literature and guidelines on the clinical effectiveness or use of abdominal space drainage with gravity or forced suction.

Clinical relevance of the detection of tumor cells in the bone marrow of patients before lung cancer surgery.

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10603-10603
Author(s):  
R. Nakahara ◽  
M. Anraku ◽  
A. Ui ◽  
N. Oohata ◽  
H. Matsuguma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Lung Cancer Surgery ◽  
Cancer Surgery

scholarly journals Effects of Vessel Interruption Sequence During Lobectomy for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiang Long ◽  
Bingxuan Wu ◽  
Wenxiong Zhang ◽  
Guoli Lv ◽  
Dongliang Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Artery First

Background: For lobectomy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), whether interrupting the pulmonary vein first (Vein-first) achieves better perioperative and survival outcomes than interrupting the pulmonary artery first (Artery-first) remains controversial. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare outcomes between the two groups to facilitate better surgical decision-making.Methods: Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus were searched for eligible studies comparing Vein-first and Artery-first procedures. The primary endpoints were survival indicators [overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS)]. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative indicators, hospitalization, and follow-up indicators.Results: After screening 2,505 studies, 8 studies involving 1,714 patients (Vein-First group: 881 patients; Artery-first group: 833 patients) were included. The vein-first group achieved better OS [HR (hazard ratio): 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12–1.91, p = 0.005], DFS (HR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.23–2.08, p &lt; 0.001), and LCSS (HR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.16–2.31, p = 0.005). The survival rates of OS at 2–5 years, DFS at 1–5 years, and LCSS at 3–5 years were also higher in the Vein-First group. Subgroup analyses suggested that the advantages of survival in the Vein-First group were primarily embodied in the subgroups of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and earlier pathological TNM stage (I–II). Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total complications, and total recurrences were comparable between the two groups.Conclusions: The Vein-first sequence is the suitable choice of vessel interruption sequence during lobectomy for NSCLC with better survival and similar perioperative outcomes, especially for stage I–II SCC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document