HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Richard O. Jones Gianluca Casali William S. Walker Permission Requests Google Scholar Articles by Jones, R. O. Articles by Walker, W. S. PubMed Articles by Jones, R. O. Articles by Walker, W. S. Related Collections Lung - cancer

---

Original Articles: General Thoracic

Does Failed Video-Assisted Lobectomy for Lung Cancer Prejudice Immediate and Long-Term Outcomes?

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Accepted for publication March 28, 2008.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Jones, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Old Dalkeith Rd, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, United Kingdom (Email: richard.o.jones{at}blueyonder.co.uk).

Background: Lobectomy for lung cancer by video-assisted thorascopic surgery (VATS) remains an infrequently performed operation despite numerous publications showing the benefits of successful VATS compared with an open thoracotomy approach. However, concern remains regarding patient safety, notably the need for emergency intraoperative conversion to open thoracotomy leading to potential adverse consequences. We therefore compared the outcomes of converted VATS patients with open thoracotomy controls.

Methods: Between May 1992 and April 2006, 30 of 286 VATS lobectomies for lung cancer required intraoperative conversion to open thoracotomy. Four patients were of advanced stage and excluded from the study. The remaining patients were matched 2:1 with open thoracotomy controls by age, sex, cancer stage, year, and type of operation. Postoperative complications and pathology were determined from the hospital discharge summary and pathology report. Long-term survival information was obtained from the family doctor or central registry.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications between the two groups (p = 0.093). There were no in-hospital deaths in the converted VATS group. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for cancer-related or unassociated death demonstrated no statistically significant difference (log-rank p = 0.1627).

Conclusions: Conversion during attempted VATS resection does not prejudice short-term or long-term surgical outcomes. We therefore suggest that VATS lobectomy should be the treatment strategy of choice for stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer in view of the well-established short-term benefits and equivalent survival associated with successful VATS resection.