Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes After Uniportal and Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy in Elderly Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-60174/v1

Download PDF

Research

Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes After Uniportal and Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy in Elderly Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-60174/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Objective: To investigate the short- and medium-term outcomes following treatment with uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (uniportal VATS) in elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis on the clinical and follow-up data of 74 elderly patients with NSCLC who underwent uniportal VATS between January 2015 and January 2020. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to select 71 elderly patients with NSCLC who underwent multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (multiportal VATS) during the same period.

Results: The baseline characteristics of the two patient groups were comparable, with no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications, operation time, conversion to thoracotomy, or lymph node dissection. The amount of intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain were lower in the uniportal VATS group than in the multiportal VATS group. The 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival of the two groups were similar.

Conclusions: Uniportal VATS achieved similar short- and medium-term outcomes as Multiportal VATS in elderly patients with NSCLC.

Oncology

lobectomy

minimally invasive surgery

non-small cell lung cancer

uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery

elderly

Lung cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death worldwide [1]. With advancements in medical technology, many modalities can be used to treat lung cancer. However, surgery remains the preferred treatment for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [2]. In recent years, uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (uniportal VATS) has been widely adopted in the field of thoracic surgery [3]. The continued aging of the population and the gradual increase in the prevalence of NSCLC have prompted growing interest in surgical treatment of elderly patients with lung cancer [4]. Elderly patients exhibit poor cardiopulmonary function, low tolerance to postoperative pain, and poor postoperative recovery [4]. Furthermore, they are more likely than younger patients to experience postoperative complications in the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. Consequently, the risk associated with surgery is extremely high in elderly patients with NSCLC [4]. Compared with multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (multiportal VATS), uniportal VATS causes less surgical trauma and less postoperative pain [5–14]. However, there have been no any English language report on the application of uniportal VATS in elderly patients (aged ≥ 70 years) with NSCLC. This study was designed to investigate the short- and medium-term outcomes of uniportal VATS for treating elderly patients with NSCLC.

This study complied with the Declaration of Helsinki. This retrospective research was approved by the ethics review board of our institution. The need for informed consent from all patients was waived because of retrospective study, not prospective trial.

The data from patients aged ≥ 70 years who underwent uniportal or multiportal VATS at our institution between January 2015 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) clinical stage I tumor; (2) primary NSCLC; (3) complete dataset. The exclusion criteria were: (1) NSCLC of the same stage in both lungs; (2) secondary lung cancer. Follow-ups by telephone and outpatient visits were initiated 1 month after surgery. The cutoff date for follow-up was June 1, 2020. To reduce the impact of confounding factors on the study results, SAS 9.3 software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC) was used. Propensity scores were calculated using surgical modality as the manipulated variable, while patients' gender, age, clinical stage, and smoking history were used as covariates. Patients in the two groups were ranked according to their propensity scores, and those with the closest propensity scores were matched in a 1:1 ratio. The caliper was set at 0.05. Analysis of the short-term efficacy and medium-term survival were performed in the two groups after matching. After exclusions, 172 patients were identified: 93 having uniportal VATS and 79 having multiportal VATS. Propensity score yielded two well-matched groups of 71 patients.

The surgical procedures were as follows. For uniportal VATS, a 3.0-cm incision was made in the 4th or 5th intercostal space between the ipsilateral anterior axillary line and midaxillary line. An incision protection sleeve was then placed on the incision, and a thoracoscope was inserted to examine the presence of pleural adhesions and tumor metastases. The lesion location and hilar anatomy were then determined. The specific surgical sequence was not identical in each lobectomy; instead, the anatomic structures, such as pulmonary veins, bronchial tubes, and pulmonary arteries were treated individually in all cases. Routine exploration and dissection of lymph node stations 2R, 4R, 7R, 8R, 9R, and 10R were performed in the case of tumors in the right lung, while routine exploration and dissection of lymph node stations 6L, 7L, 8L, 9L, and 10L were performed in the left lung [5].The multiportal VATS procedures has been reported [15].

Statistics

All the statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.3 software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). Normally distributed variables were analyzed by Student t tests and presented as means and standard deviations. Non-normally distributed variables were analyzed by Mann–Whitney U test and presented as medians and ranges. Differences between semiquantitative results were analyzed by Mann–Whitney U tests. Differences between qualitative results were analyzed by chi-square or Fisher exact tests, as appropriate. Survival rates were analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between the two groups were analyzed by log-rank test. P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

The baseline characteristics of the two patient groups were comparable (Table 1). As for surgical outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications, operation time, conversion to thoracotomy rate. At postoperative day 30, complications had occurred in nine patients in the uniportal VATS group and in 11 patients in the multiportal VATS groups (Table 2). In the uniportal VATS group, complications included arrhythmia in one patient, pulmonary infection in three patients, atelectasis in one patient, respiratory failure in one patient, prolonged air leak in two patients, and heart failure in one patient. In the multiportal VATS group, complications included arrhythmia in two patients, prolonged air leak in two patients, pulmonary infection in four patients, atelectasis in one patient, respiratory failure in one patient, and heart failure in one patient (Table 2). Appropriate measures were taken to manage different complications: antiarrhythmic drugs for arrhythmia; antibiotics for pulmonary infection; bronchoscopic suctioning for atelectasis; mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure; and diuretic drugs for heart failure. All patients were discharged upon recovery.

The amount of intraoperative blood loss (Table 2) and pain scores 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery were lower in the uniportal VATS group than in the multiportal VATS group (Table 2). The number of lymph node stations and lymph nodes dissected, as well as the number of mediastinal lymph node stations and mediastinal lymph nodes dissected, were not significantly different between the two groups (Table 3).

The median follow-up period of uniportal and multiportal VATS groups, were 28 months and 30 months respectively (P = 0.410). During the last follow-up, a total of 10 patients died in the uniportal VATS group, and a total of 14 patients died in the multiportal VATS group (Table 4, P = 0.370). The three-year overall survival rates for the uniportal and multiportal VATS groups, were 74% and 76%, respectively (Fig. 1, P = 0.935). During the last follow-up, a total of 11 patients had cancer recurrence in the uniportal VATS group, and a total of 17 patients had cancer recurrence in the multiportal VATS group (Table 4, P = 0.206). The three-year disease-free survival rates for the uniportal and multiportal VATS groups, were 69% and 67%, respectively (Fig. 1, P = 0.763).

VATS has been widely used to diagnose and treat various thoracic diseases, such as diseases of the lung, mediastinum, pleural membrane, and esophagus [16–20]. Most conventional VATS procedures use portals. Rocco et al. first reported uniportal pulmonary wedge resection in 2004 [21], and the indications for this procedure have since expanded to include many thoracic diseases, including those in the pleural membrane, mediastinum, and lung [3]. In 2011, Gonzalez et al. reported uniportal VATS, a technique that has been further promoted in recent years [22]. Currently, there is no definite age cutoff for elderly patients in clinical research involving these procedures. A review of the relevant literature revealed four various age cutoffs used in elderly patients: 65 years old, 70 years old, 75 years old, and 80 years old [23–26]. Searches of domestic and foreign literature regarding VATS in the elderly showed that relatively more publications used ≥ 70 years old as the age cutoff. Thus, the age of elderly patients was set to ≥ 70 years old in the present study. We searched databases such as PubMed and EMBASE, but could not identify any English language report on the application of uniportal VATS in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) with NSCLC. The present study was the first to show that uniportal VATS is safe and effective for treating elderly patients with NSCLC, and that uniportal VATS causes less pain and confers less blood loss than multiportal VATS.

Uniportal VATS is a relatively new surgical modality, so conversion to thoracotomy is inevitable during its initial phase of adoption [9, 10, 27]. Common causes of conversion to thoracotomy include pleural adhesions, tumor invasion, massive intraoperative hemorrhage, and injury of vital structures. Chung et al. conducted a retrospective analysis of 90 cases of uniportal VATS and found that conversion to thoracotomy occurred in 10 cases (11.1%) due to adhesions, tumor invasion, and tracheal injury [27]. Shen et al. reported 100 cases of uniportal VATS and found that one patient (1%) had conversion to thoracotomy due to massive hemorrhage [9]. Yameen reported 55 patients who had undergone uniportal VATS, five of whom (9.1%) had conversion to thoracotomy due to pleural adhesions [10]. In the present study, one patient in each of the two groups had conversion to thoracotomy. The patient in the uniportal VATS group had pleural adhesions that occurred in the early stage of uniportal VATS, and the patient in the multiportal VATS group had massive intraoperative hemorrhage. The field of vision in uniportal VATS is closer to that in thoracotomy, which allows separation of the adhered pleural membranes. No subsequent conversion to thoracotomy due to adhesions was required. With advancements in surgical techniques, iatrogenic tissue injuries can be treated using uniportal VATS. Conversion to thoracotomy is required in cases of massive intraoperative hemorrhage to ensure the safety of the procedure.

The extent of lymph node dissection and the number of lymph nodes dissected are important parameters for assessing whether radical surgery is feasible as cancer treatment [2]. These parameters also serve as an important reference for accurate postoperative staging and prognosis [2]. The combination of lobectomy and systemic lymph node dissection is the standard surgical treatment for NSCLC [2]. The guidelines developed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommend dissection of three or more mediastinal lymph node stations, and the total number of lymph nodes dissected should be at least 12 [28]. In the present study, the number of lymph nodes, lymph node stations, and N2 lymph nodes dissected in the uniportal VATS group did not differ from the equivalent numbers in the multiportal VATS group. In addition, the guidelines were met [28], indicating that uniportal VATS is safe and feasible for use in lymph node dissection.

Advancements and refinements in thoracoscopic technique have allowed minimally invasive thoracic surgery. Reduction of iatrogenic trauma and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) have become the major directions for future development of thoracic surgery. The concept of ERAS necessitates collaboration across multiple disciplines, such as anesthesia, nursing, and surgery. It involves preoperative education, preoperative preparation, keeping patients warm, anesthetics with a shorter half-life, restrictive intraoperative fluid replacement, and enabling mobility early after surgery [29]. ERAS involves cutting-edge techniques and concepts, with the core values of optimizing perioperative management and care measures, reducing complications and stress responses, and accelerating recovery. A study by Huang et al. showed that adopting ERAS during the perioperative period of uniportal VATS can alleviate postoperative pain, shorten postoperative hospital stays, and reduce the duration of chest tube placement [29]. In the present study, ERAS was implemented in the perioperative period. None of the patients in either group died within 30 days of surgery. In addition, postoperative complications after 30 days were mostly minor. One patient in each of the uniportal VATS and multiportal VATS groups had serious complications, which were cured after active treatment.

Long-term patient prognosis is the fundamental criterion for evaluating whether a novel approach to lung cancer surgery is superior to the conventional approach. Uniportal VATS was first reported in 2011 [22], while wide adoption in major medical centers began in 2014 [5–14]. According to our searches, most existing reports on uniportal VATS focus on short-term outcomes [5–14], and few have evaluated medium-term outcomes [13]. Zhao et al. reported 3-year overall survival in patients with NSCLC aged ≥ 60 years [13], including 73 who underwent uniportal VATS and 56 who underwent multiportal VATS. The results showed that 3-year overall survival was not significantly different between the two groups [13]. This was consistent with the results of the present study, which showed that 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival were similar in the two groups.

Using the propensity score matching (PSM) method [30], a propensity score is calculated for each research subject. Individuals from the control group with the same or similar propensity scores as those in the treatment group are then selected and matched. The aim of PSM is to balance the covariates between the groups. Using this method, each propensity score is treated as an independent variable that is evenly distributed between the control and treatment groups. This method is used to achieve a similar effect to randomized controlled trials and minimize study bias. PSM is now widely used in retrospective studies and non-randomized clinical trial data [30].

Several limitations of this study must be considered. The present study was a retrospective analysis in which PSM could only balance the observable variables. The impact of potential unknown factors on the observation endpoints could not be corrected. Multi-center randomized controlled trials are needed in the future to elucidate the impact. Our institution first adopted UVATS in 2015, so long-term follow-up data are lacking, which was a limitation of the study. Thus, we eagerly await confirmation of the short- and medium-term effectiveness of the two surgical modalities in multi-center prospective randomized controlled trials.

Uniportal VATS is safe and effective for treating elderly patients with NSCLC with the advantage of less pain and less blood loss.

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank our hospital colleagues who participated in this research.

Conflict of interest statement

None of the authors have any financial interest relevant to the work presented in this manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

All data included in this study are available upon request by contacting with the corresponding author.

Declaration of interest

None

Funding

None

Author contribution

Dian Zhong, Qing Lin and Zhiqiang Zhan contributed to study conception and design, Jinqiang Zhang, and Zhiqiang Zhan contributed to acquisition of data, Yujuan Liu and Zhiqiang Zhan contributed to analysis and interpretation of data, Dian Zhong, Qing Lin and Zhiqiang Zhan contributed to drafting of manuscript, Dian Zhong, Qing Lin and Zhiqiang Zhan contributed to critical revision.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by ethics review board of our institution. Due to the retrospective study design and the anonymization of data, consent to participate was not necessary.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70:7-30.
Duma N, Santana-Davila R, Molina JR. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Epidemiology, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Mayo Clin Proc 2019; 94:1623-1640.
Gonzalez-Rivas D, Yang Y, Ng C. Advances in Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: Pushing the Envelope. Thorac Surg Clin 2016; 26:187-201.
Gajra A, Akbar SA, Din NU. Management of Lung Cancer in the Elderly. Clin Geriatr Med 2016; 32:81-95.
Wang L, Liu D, Lu J, Zhang S, Yang X. The feasibility and advantage of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in pulmonary lobectomy. BMC Cancer 2017; 17:75.
Xie D, Wang H, Fei K, Chen C, Zhao D, Zhou X, Xie B, Jiang L, Chen Q, Song N, Dai J, Jiang G, Zhu Y. Single-port video-assisted thoracic surgery in 1063 cases: a single-institution experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; i31-i36.
Yang X, Wang L, Zhang C, Zhao D, Lu Y, Wang Z. The Feasibility and Advantages of Subxiphoid Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery in Pulmonary Lobectomy. World J Surg 2019; 43:1841-1849.
Al-Ameri M, Sachs E, Sartipy U, Jackson V. Uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer. J Thorac Dis 2019; 11:5152-5161.
Shen Y, Wang H, Feng M, Xi Y, Tan L, Wang Q. Single- versus multiple-port thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer: a propensity-matched study†. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 49 Suppl 1:i48-53.
Bin Yameen TA, Gupta V, Behzadi A. Uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer: a Canadian single-centre retrospective study. Can J Surg 2019; 62:468-474.
Tosi D, Nosotti M, Bonitta G, Mazzucco A, Righi I, Mendogni P, Rosso L, Palleschi A, Rocco G, Crisci R; Italian VATS Group. Uniportal and three-portal video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: analysis of the Italian video-assisted thoracic surgery group database. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2019; 29:714-721.
Wang BY, Liu CY, Hsu PK, Shih CS, Liu CC. Single-incision versus multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy: a propensity-matched analysis. Ann Surg 2015; 261:793-9.
Zhao R, Shi Z, Cheng S. Uniport video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (U-VATS) exhibits increased feasibility, non-inferior tolerance, and equal efficiency compared with multiport VATS and open thoracotomy in the elderly non-small cell lung cancer patients at early stage. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019; 98:e16137.
Perna V, Carvajal AF, Torrecilla JA, Gigirey O. Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus other video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy techniques: a randomized study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 50:411-415.
Zhang L. Short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated using video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2018; 14:2213-2220.
Zhu Y, Chen W. Very long-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J BUON 2015; 20:1585-1591.
Yang X, Wang S, Qu J. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) compares favorably with thoracotomy for the treatment of lung cancer: a five-year outcome comparison. World J Surg 2009; 33:1857-1861.
Ghaly G, Kamel M, Nasar A, Paul S, Lee PC, Port JL, Stiles BM, Altorki NK. Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Thoracotomy for Anatomical Segmentectomy in Patients With Clinical Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2016; 101:465-472; discussion 472.
Kim K, Kim HK, Park JS, Chang SW, Choi YS, Kim J, Shim YM. Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: single institutional experience with 704 cases. Ann Thorac Surg 2010; 89:S2118-S2122.
Wang BY, Huang JY, Lin CH, Ko JL, Chou CT, Wu YC, Lin SH, Liaw YP. Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Produces Long-Term Survival Similar to That with Open Lobectomy in Cases of Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma: A Propensity-Matched Analysis Using a Population-Based Cancer Registry. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11:1326-1334.
Rocco G, Martin-Ucar A, Passera E. Uniportal VATS wedge pulmonary resections. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 77:726-728.
Gonzalez D, Paradela M, Garcia J, Dela Torre M. Single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011; 12:514-515.
Cattaneo SM, Park BJ, Wilton AS, Seshan VE, Bains MS, Downey RJ, Flores RM, Rizk N, Rusch VW. Use of video-assisted thoracic surgery for lobectomy in the elderly results in fewer complications. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85:231-235; discussion 235-236.
Koizumi K, Haraguchi S, Hirata T, Hirai K, Mikami I, Fukushima M, Okada D, Yamagishi S, Enomoto Y, Nakayama K, Akiyama H, Tanaka S. Lobectomy by video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer patients aged 80 years or more. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 9:14-21.
Amer K, Khan AZ, Vohra H, Saad R. Is it safe to include octogenarians at the start of a video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy programme? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012; 41:346-352.
Koizumi K, Haraguchi S, Hirata T, Hirai K, Mikami I, Fukushima M, Kubokura H, Okada D, Akiyama H, Tanaka S. Video-assisted lobectomy in elderly lung cancer patients. Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 50:15-22.
Chung JH, Choi YS, Cho JH, Kim HK, Kim J, Zo JI, Shim YM. Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: an alternative to conventional thoracoscopic lobectomy in lung cancer surgery? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2015; 20:813-819.
Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aggarwal C, Aisner DL, Akerley W, Bauman JR, Bharat A, Bruno DS, Chang JY, Chirieac LR, D'Amico TA, Dilling TJ, Dobelbower M, Gettinger S, Govindan R, Gubens MA, Hennon M, Horn L, Lackner RP, Lanuti M, Leal TA, Lin J, Loo BW Jr, Martins RG, Otterson GA, Patel SP, Reckamp KL, Riely GJ, Schild SE, Shapiro TA, Stevenson J, Swanson SJ, Tauer KW, Yang SC, Gregory K; OCN, Hughes M. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 1.2020. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2019; 17:1464-1472.
Huang H, Ma H, Chen S. Enhanced recovery after surgery using uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer: A preliminary study. Thorac Cancer 2018; 9:83-87.
Mei J, Guo C, Xia L, Liao H, Pu Q, Ma L, Liu C, Zhu Y, Lin F, Yang Z, Zhao K, Che G, Liu L. Long-term survival outcomes of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for stage I-II non-small cell lung cancer are more favorable than thoracotomy: a propensity score-matched analysis from a high-volume center in China. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2019; 8:155-166.

Table 1

Baseline characteristics of the two groups
Characteristics	Uniportal VATS (n = 71)	Multiportal VATS (n = 71)	P value
Age (y)	72 (70–75)	73 (70–76)	0.479
Gender Male Female	46 25	49 22	0.593
Charlson comorbidity index (CCI)
CCI ≤ 2 CCI > 2	8 63	10 61	0.615
Pulmonary function FVC (% predicted) FEV1 (% predicted)	87 (79–91) 85 (81–93)	90 (80–92) 83 (78–90)	0.874 0.597
MVV (% predicted)	68 (57–75)	66 (54–72)	0.417
Clinical TNM stage IA	26	29	0.607
IB	45	42
ASA score I	64	62	0.595
II	4	5
III	3	4
Smoking status
Yes No	37 34	33 38	0.502
Tumor location			0.310
Left Right	34 37	28 43
CCI: Charlson comorbidity index ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists FEV1: Forced Expiratory Volume in the first second MVV: maximal voluntary ventilation

Table 2

Surgical outcomes of the two groups
Characteristics	Uniportal VATS (n = 71)		P value
Lobectomy Left upper lobe Left lower lobe	21 13	13 15	0.116 0.673
Right upper lobe	15	21	0.247
Right middle lobe	5	7	0.546
Right lower lobe	17	15	0.688
Blood transfusion Blood loss (ml)	0 100 (80–240)	0 120 (90–260)	- 0.045
Drainage duration (day) Postoperative pain VAS score	4 (3–6)	5 (3–7)	0.247
24 h	4 (2–6)	5 (3–7)	0.030
48 h	3 (2–5)	4 (2–7)	0.044
72 h	2 (1–3)	3 (2–6)	0.046
Postoperative hospital stay (d)	9 (7–17)	10 (7–21)	0.354
Post-operative complications	9	11	0.629
Respiratory failure	1	1
Atelectasis	1	1
Prolonged air leak (> 5 days)	2	2
Pneumonia	3	4
Arrythmia Heart failure	1 1	2 1
Major complications Minor complications	1 8	1 10	0.941
Postoperative 30-day death	0	0	-
VAS: visual analogue scale

Table 3

Pathological outcomes of the two groups
Outcomes	Uniportal VATS (n = 71)	Multiportal VATS (n = 71)	P value
Histological type Adenocarcinoma	48	43	0.382
Squamous cell carcinoma	23	28
Number of harvested lymph nodes Number of mediastinal lymph nodes dissected	18 (14–21) 7 (5–11)	19 (15–23) 8 (6–10)	0.478 0.404
Pathological stage IA IB IIA	15 27 10	16 23 12	0.911
IIB	12	15
IIIA	7	5
Residual tumor R0 R1 R2	71 0 0	71 0 0	1.000

Table 4
The follow-up outcomes of the two groups
	Uniportal VATS (n = 71)	Multiportal VATS (n = 71)	P value
tumor recurrence during follow-up Locoregional alone	11 4	17 3	0.206
Distant alone	7	12
Both locoregional and distant Port site	1 0	2 0
Time to first cancer recurrence (months)	21 (10–30)	20 (5–42)	0.599
Mortality during follow-up period	10	14	0.370
Died of cancer cause	9	13
Died of non-cancer causes	1	1

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes After Uniportal and Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy in Elderly Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Patients And Methods

Statistics

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Tables

Status:

Version 1