Chest Email Content Delivery
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Travaline, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Criner, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Travaline, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Criner, G. J.
(Chest. 1998;114:981-987.)
© 1998 American College of Chest Physicians

Bilateral Apical vs Nonapical Stapling Resection During Lung Volume Reduction Surgery

John M. Travaline MD, FCCP1; Satoshi Furukawa MD1; Anne Marie Kuzma MS1; Gerald M. O'Brien MD, FCCP1; and Gerard J. Criner MD, FCCP1

1 From the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, and Cardiothoracic Surgery, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.

John M. Travaline, MD, FCCP, Pulmonary and Critical Care, Temple University School of Medicine, 3401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA 19140

Study Objectives: To determine whether biapical stapling resection alone or resection of diseased, nonapical areas of emphysematous lung provides comparable physiologic outcomes or alters morbidity and mortality after lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS).

Design: Consecutive case-series analysis.

Setting: Urban university hospital.

Patients: Forty-seven patients ([mean ± SD] aged 58 ± 8 years; 18 men) with severe emphysema (FEV1, 0.7 ± 0.2 L; total lung capacity [TLC], 139 ± 23% predicted).

Interventions: Thirty-two patients underwent biapical LVRS, 27 by median sternotomy (MS) and 5 by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and 15 underwent nonapical resection, 9 by MS and 6 by VATS. Patients were assessed for postoperative complications (respiratory tract infections, air leak duration, and death), length of stay, and physiologic parameters, which included a 6-min walk distance, spirometry, lung volume, gas exchange, diaphragm strength, and quality-of-life measures.

Measurements and Results: Patients were studied at baseline and at 3 months postoperatively. At the preoperative baseline, both groups had similar ages (57 vs 60 years; p = 0.2), 6-min walk distance (294 vs 263 m; p = 0.3), FEV1 (28% vs 29% predicted; p = 0.6), degree of hyperinflation (TLC, 138% vs 141% predicted; p = 0.8), gas exchange (PaO2/fraction of inspired oxygen, 344 vs 313, p = 0.1; PaCO2 46 vs 48 mm Hg, p = 0.4), and diaphragm strength (maximal transdiaphragmatic pressure sniff, 54 vs 46 cm H2O, p = 0.4). Resected tissue weight was similar in both groups (94 vs 93 g, p = 0.9). There were no differences in the mean percentage of change from baseline for these physiologic parameters or for quality-of-life measures between the two groups. The 6-min walk distances increased by 20% and 33%, FEV1 increased by 37% and 38%, the degrees of hyperinflation (residual volume/TLC) decreased by 16% and 15%, and the quality-of-life scores improved by 51% and 41%, respectively, in the groups that underwent biapical and nonapical resections at 3 months post-LVRS. The length of stay in the hospital for LVRS (18 vs 23 days; p = 0.4) and the duration of air leak (10 vs 15 days; p = 0.4) were also similar. Complications between the two groups (biapical vs nonapical) were similar (respiratory tract infection, 47% vs 60%, p = 0.2; reintubation, 34% vs 33%, p = 0.2; reoperation, 9% vs 20%, p = 0.4; and death, 9% vs 7%, p = 0.2).

Conclusions: LVRS, by biapical or nonapical resection, produces similar improvements in lung function, exercise, diaphragm strength, and quality of life, with comparable morbidity and mortality.

Key Words: COPD • emphysema • lung volume reduction surgery • reduction pneumoplasty

Submitted on February 5, 1998
Accepted on May 20, 1998




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ThoraxHome page
H O Coxson, K P Whittall, Y Nakano, R M Rogers, F C Sciurba, R J Keenan, and J C Hogg
Selection of patients for lung volume reduction surgery using a power law analysis of the computed tomographic scan
Thorax, June 1, 2003; 58(6): 510 - 514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
R. M. Kotloff, J. Hansen-Flaschen, D. A. Lipson, G. Tino, S. M. Arcasoy, A. Alavi, and L. R. Kaiser
Apical Perfusion Fraction as a Predictor of Short-term Functional Outcome Following Bilateral Lung Volume Reduction Surgery
Chest, November 1, 2001; 120(5): 1609 - 1615.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American College of Chest Physicians.