|
|
||||||||
a Department of Thoracic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
b Department of Pediatrics, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
Accepted for publication January 14, 2008.
* Address correspondence to Dr Jhingook Kim, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, 50 Ilwon-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 135-710, Korea (Email: jkimsmc{at}skku.edu).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods: Between 1995 and 2006, 45 patients underwent surgical resection for CCAM. Ten patients received a segmentectomy and 2 a wedge resection (the parenchyma-saving group), and 32 received a lobectomy and 1 a pneumonectomy (the lobectomy group). A retrospective analysis was done to compare the early and late postoperative outcomes between two groups.
Results: No significant differences were observed for severity and duration of preoperative symptoms. No in-hospital or late deaths occurred. There were no significant differences in the incidence of early postoperative complications and late morbidities between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the two groups for hospital length of stay and duration of chest tube placement.
Conclusions: The early and late outcomes were excellent even after parenchyma-saving resection in patients with CCAM. We suggest that parenchyma-saving resection can be safely performed in selected patients with a well-confined CCAM lesion and thereby avoiding pneumonectomy in children.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patients undergoing this parenchyma-saving resection, however, are likely to have early postoperative morbidities such as recurrent pulmonary infection or prolonged air leakage, and in cases with a residual lesion, malignant transformation as well as recurrent infection could occur during follow-up. For this reason, most surgeons have been reluctant to perform parenchyma-saving resection for CCAM and the optimal extent of resection in CCAM patients has been controversial [6, 7]. Despite these debates, we have attempted to preserve the lung parenchyma, when this is both feasible and safe, in selected patients with extensive lesions at our institution. The objectives of this study were to compare the early and late postoperative outcomes according to the extent of resection in CCAM patients and to determine if the extent of resection would influence the short- and long-term results.
| Patients and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Six patients (13.3%) were diagnosed with CCAM prenatally by fetal ultrasonography and their median age at the time of operation was 1.2 years. All patients underwent computed tomographic (CT) scanning of the chest to evaluate the extent of their CCAM. Surgical resection for CCAM was recommended when patients had symptoms such as respiratory difficulty or recurrent pulmonary infection. Even in asymptomatic patients, surgical resection was also indicated when the extent of lesion was estimated to involve more than half of a lobe, as seen on their CT scans. When patients were diagnosed prenatally or during the neonatal period, whether to proceed with surgical resection depended on the presence of symptoms; operations were postponed until the age of 6 months if patients showed no symptoms, but were urgently performed, regardless of the age at presentation, if patients showed significant symptoms.
A lobectomy was the procedure of choice for the treatment of CCAM. A segmentectomy or wedge resection was chosen when this was considered feasible owing to the well-confined pathology. When more than one lobe was affected, then a segmentectomy of one lobe combined with a lobectomy of another lobe or multiple segmentectomies were performed to avoid a pneumonectomy. A lobectomy was performed in 32 patients and a pneumonectomy was performed in 1; a segmentectomy was performed in 10 patients and wedge resection was performed in 2. Among the 10 patients who underwent a segmentectomy, a single segmentectomy was performed in 6 patients, multiple segmentectomies were done in 3, and a lobectomy of one lobe in conjunction with a segmentectomy of another lobe was done in 1. The operative techniques are summarized in Table 1. The study population was divided into two groups by the extent of resection; that is, 33 patients were in the lobectomy group (lobectomy or pneumonectomy), and 12 were in the parenchyma-saving group (segmentectomy or wedge resection).
|
All patients were regularly followed up postoperatively. Telephone interviews were conducted with patients who were lost to follow-up to obtain the late postoperative outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to describe patient characteristics and outcomes. The normally distributed continuous data were expressed as means ± standard deviations. Categoric data were expressed as counts and proportions. Student t tests and
2 or Fisher exact tests were used to compare the continuous and categoric variables, respectively. Significance was accepted at values of p < 0.05.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Late Follow-Up Outcomes
Follow-up was completed for all the patients, with a mean duration of 63.8 months (range, 9.5 to 149.3 months). There were no significant differences in the follow-up duration between the two groups. No late deaths occurred during follow-up.
In the lobectomy group, two patients (6.1%) had late morbidities: 1 patient had spontaneous pneumothorax and mycoplasma pneumonia developed in 1 patient at 10 months after lobectomy; this patient recovered after antibiotic treatment. Among the parenchyma-saving group, only one late complication (8.3%) occurred during follow-up. Bacterial pneumonia developed 5 months postoperatively in the patient who had undergone multiple segmentectomies. There were no significant differences in the incidence of late morbidities between the two groups.
Eight patients (24.2%) in the lobectomy group and 8 (66.7%) in the parenchyma-saving group underwent postoperative CT scans during follow-up. No residual lesions were found in the lobectomy group, but 1 patient in the parenchyma-saving group showed a residual lesion. This patient had undergone a left lower lobe basal segmentectomy and he has been followed up for the residual lesion without any symptoms.
None of the patients who received operations during childhood reported growth retardation on their follow-up. The data for the early and late postoperative outcomes after surgical treatment for CCAM are summarized in Table 3.
|
| Comment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Most authors have nevertheless advocated early elective operation to avoid the potential risks of untreated CCAM such as recurrent pulmonary infection or malignant transformation [7, 9, 15–19]. The incidence of postoperative complications is also assumed to be lower after early elective operation for CCAM than after an urgent intervention for CCAM complications [5, 20]. Moreover, it has been known that resection of a compressive lung lesion enables the remaining lung to induce its compensatory growth [5]. To summarize, the accumulated hazards of pulmonary infection and the risks of malignancy later in life outweigh the risks of early and elective surgery [7]. It therefore stands to reason that we have performed urgent operations for CCAM patients when they have symptoms such as respiratory difficulty or recurrent pulmonary infection. In the same context, surgical resection was recommended even for the asymptomatic CCAM patients when the extent of the lesion was considered significant enough to result in complications related to CCAM.
Lobectomy is the procedure of choice for patients with CCAM, especially when the lesion is confined to a single lobe. Infants and children tolerate lobectomy well, with compensatory lung growth, so that the total lung volume and gas exchange capacity return toward normal during somatic maturation [12, 21]. However, when multiple lobes are affected in patients with CCAM, then extensive resection such as pneumonectomy or bilobectomy seems to be unavoidable if we stick to the principle of lobectomy. A parenchyma-saving procedure in these circumstances makes it possible to avoid performing extensive resection beyond a simple lobectomy procedure. Theoretically, as long as parenchyma-saving resection is feasible and safe, preserving the normal pulmonary parenchyma would be ideal in patients, such as neonates and infants, who have growth potential.
A more conservative policy of segmentectomy seems to have been followed by some investigators [17, 18]. Davenport and coworkers [7] advocated a conservative approach of performing lobectomy of the most involved lobe and performing segmentectomy of the remaining cysts when the lesion involved adjacent lobes in CCAM patients. Yet it should be noted that parenchyma-saving resection can be complicated by a prolonged air leak in the early postoperative period, and in patients with a residual lesion, malignant transformation as well as recurrent infection could develop during follow-up, which would necessitate a repeat operation [6, 18, 22]. For this reason, the optimal extent of resection in CCAM patients has been controversial.
Despite these potential disadvantages of parenchyma-saving resection, we have attempted to preserve the lung parenchyma whenever possible in selected cases. A segmentectomy or wedge resection was performed when it was considered feasible owing to the well-confined pathology. When more than one lobe was affected, then a segmentectomy in conjunction with lobectomy, or multiple segmentectomies, were performed to avoid pneumonectomy. In contrast with other researchers' previous concerns, our data showed excellent early and late outcomes. Of the 12 patients who underwent parenchyma-saving resection, only one incidence of a prolonged air leak occurred; during follow-up, only one patient was found to have a residual lesion, and this required no further treatment. The differences in the hospital length of stay or the duration of postoperative chest tube placement between the lobectomy group and the parenchyma-saving group were not significant.
In fact, it is difficult to explain the reason why the outcomes of parenchyma-saving resection were relatively good in our series. Possibly, we decided to preserve the pulmonary parenchyma in highly selected patients who had well-confined lesion and this might have led to our excellent results. This means, in other words, performing parenchyma-saving resection might not be desirable in patients with diffuse, poorly confined lesions, even though it is highly likely to perform a pneumonectomy in these cases due to multiple lobes involvement. Lobectomy is obviously the standard procedure for patients with CCAM, but parenchyma-saving resection should be taken into consideration for selected cases in which multiple lobes are involved and the procedure appears to be feasible due to the well-confined lesion.
Our study has several limitations. Because our data were retrospectively collected and parenchyma-saving resection was performed in only selected cases, it seems difficult to ascertain whether lobectomy should be always performed in CCAM patients. This might be inappropriate if we tried to determine which procedure would be optimal regarding the extent of resection in CCAM patients based solely on this series. Had we performed a prospective, randomized controlled trial, it would have been helpful to determine if parenchyma-saving resection could be justified even in patients with localized CCAM.
In addition, the study population was rather small and thus it does not seem that the power of our suggestions is so strong as to be conclusive. Despite these limitations, however, we can firmly suggest that parenchyma-saving resection is one of the surgical options in highly selected cases of CCAM, especially when multiple lobes are involved and so performing a pneumonectomy is inevitable.
In summary, although a lobectomy was the procedure of choice at our institution for the treatment of CCAM, parenchyma-saving resection was performed in selected patients to avoid an extensive resection. We compared the early and late postoperative outcomes according to the extent of resection in CCAM patients and we tried to determine if the extent of resection would influence both the short- and long-term results. The early and late outcomes were excellent even after parenchyma-saving resection, in contrast to the previous concerns raised by the past reports. We suggest that parenchyma-saving resection can be safely performed in selected patients with a well-confined CCAM lesion, and so this avoids performing pneumonectomy in children, a procedure with potentially devastating outcomes.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |