Chest ACCP Career Connection
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, W. W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Yim, A. P. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, W. W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Yim, A. P. C.
(Chest. 2002;122:584-589.)
© 2002 American College of Chest Physicians

Quality of Life Following Lung Cancer Resection*

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery vs Thoracotomy

Wilson W. L. Li; T. W. Lee, MB, ChB; Shirley S. Y. Lam, RN; Calvin S. H. Ng, MBBS (Hons); Alan D. L. Sihoe, MB, BChir; Innes Y. P. Wan, MB, ChB and Anthony P. C. Yim, MD, FCCP

* From the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Correspondence to: Anthony P. C. Yim, MD, FCCP, Professor and Chief, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong SAR, China; e-mail: yimap{at}cuhk.edu.hk


   Abstract
TOP
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Study objectives: Quality of life (QOL) following video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) major lung resection has not been systematically studied. This study was designed to evaluate the intermediate to long-term QOL in patients with lung cancer following resection, comparing VATS with thoracotomy.

Design: Cross-sectional study, telephone survey.

Methods: Of 136 disease-free surviving patients with non-small cell lung cancer operated on between 1994 and 2000, 45 patients were excluded because of large tumors (> 5 cm) or locally advanced disease, and another 27 patients were excluded because of adjuvant therapy, coexisting cancer from another source, or psychiatric illness. At the time of the survey, 13 patients were found to be either unsuitable or unwilling to participate. This left a total of 51 patients, with 27 patients in the VATS group and 24 patients in the thoracotomy group (open group), for the final analysis. QOL was assessed using Chinese versions of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-LC13, supplemented with nine self-developed surgery-related questions.

Results: Mean follow-up time was 33.5 months in the VATS group (median, 20.8 months; range, 6.0 to 84.2 months) and 39.4 months in the open group (median, 37.7 months; range, 7.0 to 75.1 months). Both groups had good QOL and high levels of functioning despite a fairly high incidence of symptoms. There was a trend for VATS patients to score higher on the QOL and functioning scales and to report fewer symptoms. However, these differences did not lead to statistical significance.

Conclusions: This study showed that lung cancer patients with resectable disease following surgical treatment without recurrence have good QOL and high levels of functioning on intermediate to long-term follow-up, with no significant differences between the VATS and open groups.

Key Words: lung cancer • quality of life • thoracotomy • video-assisted thoracic surgery


   Introduction
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Surgical resection continues to be the mainstay of treatment for early non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).1 Traditionally, this is done through a thoracotomy. However, with the introduction of minimal access techniques, major pulmonary resec-tions can now be performed with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS).

The fact that access trauma is lessened in VATS has been well documented. Studies on lobectomy comparing VATS with thoracotomy have suggested that the former is associated with short-term benefits such as decreased postoperative pain,2 3 4 5 decreased perioperative morbidity,4 5 6 7 better postoperative pulmonary function,8 9 reduced length of hospital stay,3 6 10 lower hospital costs5 10 and earlier return to normal activities.3 11 However, the effect of these early benefits on the patient’s long-term quality of life (QOL) remains uncertain. With the building evidence that survival after VATS lobectomy is similar to the survival after lobectomy by thoracotomy,5 6 7 8 12 QOL assessments become increasingly important in the evaluation of these treatment options. Sugiura et al11 attempted to assess the long-term QOL in lung cancer patients after lobectomy, comparing VATS (n = 20) with thoracotomy (n = 15); they suggested that VATS lobectomy was associated with improved long-term QOL. However, they used a limited questionnaire containing only six questions. No studies have been undertaken to our knowledge on postoperative long-term QOL in patients undergoing VATS using standardized questionnaires. We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess the intermediate to long-term QOL in patients with early NSCLC after major lung resection, comparing VATS with the standard posterolateral thoracotomy approach, the results of which form the basis of this publication.


   Materials and Methods
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Patients
All surviving patients with resectable NSCLC who underwent surgical resection at the Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, between March 1994 and October 2000, with no evidence of recurrence were considered for this study. All patients underwent surgery at least 6 months previously. One hundred thirty-six patients were initially regarded as potential candidates. In order to make both groups comparable, patients with tumor size > 5 cm or locally advanced tumor requiring extended resection were excluded from the study (n = 45), as these patients would not be candidates for VATS. Patients who received adjuvant therapy (n = 14) or had other forms of cancer (n = 11) or psychiatric illness (n = 2) were also excluded from the study. At time of the telephone survey, two patients were hospitalized for stroke and were unable to participate. Three patients were unavailable for follow-up, and six patients were unable to understand the questionnaires due to old age or senile dementia. Two patients refused to participate in the study. As a result, a total of 51 patients were available for analysis, including 27 patients who underwent VATS lobectomy (VATS group) and 24 patients who underwent lobectomy by thoracotomy (open group).

Operative Technique
Our technique for VATS lobectomy has been described in detail elsewhere.2 7 We emphasize on avoiding rib spreading and torquing of the thoracoscope at all times. For open lobectomy, we perform the standard posterolateral thoracotomy with division of the latissimus dorsi and serratus anterior muscles.

QOL Assessment
QOL was assessed using three different questionnaires: the Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 (cancer core questionnaire), the Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-LC13 lung cancer-specific questionnaire module, and a self-developed module containing nine additional surgery-related questions. The questionnaires were sent to the patients, accompanied by a letter with general information and aim of the study. All QOL data were collected thereafter by a trained research nurse through telephone interviews. In order to avoid bias, the operating surgeons were not involved at any point in the questioning.

EORTC QLQ-C30
The EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) is a self-rating questionnaire composed of 30 questions/items and incorporates nine multi-item scales: five functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting), a global health/QOL scale, and several single items assessing additional symptoms (dyspnea, sleep disturbance, constipation, and diarrhea). A final item evaluates the perceived economic consequences of the disease. Reliability and validity of the English and Chinese versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire have been confirmed in international studies.13 14 15

EORTC QLQ-LC13
The EORTC QLQ-LC13 is a supplemental questionnaire module that was designed for use among patients receiving treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. It contains 13 questions/items assessing lung cancer-associated symptoms (cough, hemoptysis, dyspnea, and site-specific pain), chemotherapy/radiotherapy-related side effects (sore mouth, dysphagia, peripheral neuropathy, and alopecia), and pain medication. The dyspnea scale was aggregated into a four-item scale by including the single dyspnea item of the EORTC QLQ-C30 core questionnaire.16 Chemotherapy/radiotherapy-related side effects were not included in the analysis. Reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-LC13 module have been confirmed in international studies.15 16

Additional Questions
No lung cancer surgery-specific module has as yet been developed for use with EORTC questionnaires. In order to develop such a module, a lung cancer surgical treatment literature review was undertaken and discussions were held with cardiothoracic surgeons. Main lung cancer surgery-related problems are dyspnea, shoulder dysfunction, scar problems, and thoracotomy pain. Dyspnea is sufficiently covered by combining the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 into one dyspnea scale, as described in a previous study.16 Therefore, we produced a series of questions to assess the patient’s shoulder function, scar problems, thoracotomy pain, and their effect on the patient’s QOL. An additional question was added to assess the overall satisfaction with the surgical procedure. The selfdeveloped questions were modified into nine questions/items (Table 1 ) after testing in a pilot study with 24 patients. The items have the same format and scale scoring as the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 and employ the same time frame. The nine items are classified into three multi-item symptom scales assessing shoulder dysfunction, scar problems, and postthoracotomy pain; one final single item assesses the overall satisfaction with the surgical procedure.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1.. Self-Developed Lung Cancer Surgery-Related Questions Supplemented to the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13

 
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using statistical software (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows, version 10.0; SPSS; Chicago, IL). All scores of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 and additional questions were linearly transformed so that all scales range from 0 to 100. For the global health/QOL and functioning scales, higher scores represent a higher level of functioning. For the symptom scales, higher scores represent a greater degree of symptoms. The proportion of patients who have a specific symptom is defined as the percentage of patients who reported a symptom scale scoring > 0. Results are reported as mean, SD, and frequency. QOL data were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test; frequencies were compared using a {chi}2 test. If an expected frequency in at least one cell of the table in the {chi}2 test is < 5, the Fisher exact test was computed instead. Spearman rank-correlation coefficient was used to examine correlations between variables. A two-tailed p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The reliability of the multi-item scales was assessed using Cronbach {alpha} coefficient for internal consistency. Cronbach’s {alpha} coefficient > 0.5 signals acceptable reliability, while Cronbach’s {alpha} coefficient > 0.7 was considered good reliability.


   Results
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Fifty-one patients were recruited for the study, and their characteristics are shown in Table 2 . There are 27 patients in the VATS group and 24 patients in the open group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, sex, education level, marital status, or follow-up period. Mean follow-up time was 33.5 months in the VATS group (median, 20.8 months; range, 6.0 to 84.2 months) and 39.4 months in the open group (median, 37.7 months; range, 7.0 to 75.1 months). Pathologic data are described in Table 3 .


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2.. Demographic Data of the Study Populations*

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3.. Pathologic Data and Surgery Performed*

 
All patients successfully completed the questionnaires. All questionnaires were well understood, including the nine self-developed items. Mean scores and SDs of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 functioning and symptom scales, and selfdeveloped QOL scales are shown in Tables 4 , 5 . Both groups reported high satisfaction with the surgical procedure. Also, both the VATS group and the open group reported good QOL and high levels of functioning overall, despite a fairly high incidence of reported symptoms (Tables 4 , 5) . The most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue, coughing, dyspnea, and thoracotomy pain. There was a trend for VATS patients to score higher on the QOL and functioning scales and to report fewer symptoms. Furthermore, patients undergoing VATS tended to take less pain medication. However, of all the functioning and symptom scales, only the constipation scale showed significant difference (p < 0.001) in favor of patients undergoing VATS.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4.. EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 Scores in Lung Cancer Patients After Surgery*

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 5.. Reported Scores of the Self-Developed Lung Cancer Surgery-Related Questions in Lung Cancer Patients After Surgery*

 
All EORTC multi-item scales showed at least acceptable reliability (Table 6 ). Furthermore, the Cronbach {alpha} coefficients for the three self-developed multi-item QOL scales showed good reliability as well.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 6.. Multi-item Scale Reliability (Cronbach {alpha} Coefficients)

 

   Discussion
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
In our study, we found that our patients undergoing VATS and thoracotomy enjoyed good QOL and high levels of functioning after a mean follow-up of 3 years. VATS patients tended to score higher on QOL and functioning scales and reported relatively fewer symptoms. However, comparison of these scales did not reveal any significant differences.

Particular attention has been paid in this study to the incidence of long-term pain. This was assessed with the EORTC pain scales, supplemented with our selfdeveloped thoracotomy pain scale, which combined the scores of questions on pain and numbness in and around the scar, along with effects of climatic changes. A large percentage of both groups of patients still reported some degree of pain (VATS group, 74%; open group, 75%; Table 5 ). However, the reported mean scores for pain were low, with no significant differences found between the two groups. Furthermore, there was no significant difference regarding the current use of pain medication. However, it was interesting to see that constipation was the only significantly different symptom among the two groups. This could be related to a difference in the overall use of analgesia after surgery.

Our findings seem to be consistent with some reported studies. Nomori et al17 recently reported no significant differences between their VATS group and an anterior thoracotomy group for lung cancer resection in terms of postoperative respiratory muscle strength, 6-min walk test, and pain scores after 2 weeks. However, it should be noted that in their VATS group, rib spreading was used.18 Landreneau et al19 studied the prevalence of chronic pain and pain-related morbidity after pulmonary resection comparing VATS with thoracotomy; they found that VATS is associated with reduced pain and shoulder dysfunction during the first year after surgery. However, no significant differences could be found after a year follow-up. Dales et al20 studied prospectively the QOL in lung cancer patients following surgical resection through thoracotomy; they found that QOL deteriorated in the first 3 months after surgery but returned to preoperative levels at 6 to 9 months. Similar findings were reported by Zieren et al21 in a more recent study. Possible QOL benefits of VATS are therefore likely to be maximal up to 9 months postoperatively. However, Sugiura et al11 attempted to assess the long-term QOL in lung cancer patients following surgery comparing VATS with thoracotomy; they found that VATS was associated with long-term QOL benefits. However, a limited, nonvalidated questionnaire was used in this study that contained only six questions. Furthermore, there was a significant difference in follow-up time (VATS, 12.6 months; thoracotomy, 33.6 months; p = 0.0001), making comparison less valid.

We acknowledge that our present study has several limitations. First of all, our findings are limited by the small sample size. This is a critical point in our investigation, calling for cautious conclusions at this stage. If QOL benefits exist for VATS patients after long-term follow-up, they are likely to be small. Therefore, with our current sample size, these differences are less likely to be found statistically significant. Furthermore, due to the cross-sectional design of the study, randomization or collection of QOL data at baseline was not possible. To adjust for the lack of randomization, selection criteria for the study were strict in order to reduce the number of possible confounding factors that could have affected the two groups’ preoperative and postoperative QOL besides their difference in surgical approach. Cross-sectional studies still yield valuable information, but the dynamic characteristics of QOL are best assessed in a longitudinal setting. However, in the absence of preoperative baseline assessments, we cannot determine whether VATS and thoracotomy patients have comparable preoperative data, or whether we are instead studying two groups of patients with different initial levels of QOL. Future studies need to be prospective, longitudinal and should include larger study populations. And finally, although we used standardized questionnaires to assess QOL, the reliability and validity of the EORTC questionnaires have been confirmed in stage III and IV lung cancer patients only.13 14 15 16 It is unknown whether these standardized questionnaires are also applicable to early lung cancer patients. Regarding our selfdeveloped questionnaire, psychometric analysis revealed high Cronbach {alpha} coefficients for the three self-developed surgery related multi-item symptom scales (Table 6) , suggesting a high level of construct validity and an adequate grouping of the selfdeveloped item scales. However, these questions are used for the first time and may require more extensive validation. Further studies are needed to assess the psychometric properties of this lung cancer surgery-specific QOL questionnaire module in the current groups of patients.

To our knowledge, this study represents a first step in documenting intermediate to long-term QOL in lung cancer patients following surgery using standardized and validated questionnaires. Despite the mentioned limitations and the lack of statistically significant findings, our findings offer valuable information. Major advantages of the VATS procedure should be found mainly in the early postoperative period. Therefore, equal performance regarding QOL11 and length of survival5 6 7 8 12 after long-term follow-up would already justify the application of VATS for the resection of early stage lung cancers.

In conclusion, we found in this cross-sectional study that lung cancer patients, following surgical treatment through either VATS or thoracotomy with intermediate to long-term follow-up without recurrence, enjoy good QOL and high levels of functioning. Although VATS patients tended to score higher on the QOL and functioning scales and reported relatively fewer symptoms, there were no significant differences. Prospective randomized studies with long-term follow-up would be warranted to confirm these findings, which we are currently undertaking.


   Acknowledgements
 
The authors thank Professor Benny C. Y. Zee, PhD, and Tony S. K. Mok, MD, for thoughtful input.


   Footnotes
 
Abbreviations: EORTC = European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; NSCLC = non-small cell lung carcinoma; QLQ = Quality of Life Questionnaire; QOL = quality of life; VATS = video-assisted thoracic surgery

Received for publication September 21, 2001. Accepted for publication March 18, 2002.


   References
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Deslauriers, J, Gregoire, J (2000) Surgical therapy of early non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 117,104S-109S[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Yim, AP, Ko, KM, Chau, WS, et al Video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lung resections: the initial Hong Kong experience. Chest 1996;109,13-17[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Demmy, TL, Curtis, JJ Minimally invasive lobectomy directed toward frail and high-risk patients: a case-control study. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;68,194-200[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Giudicelli, R, Thomas, P, Lonjon, T, et al Video-assisted minithoracotomy vs muscle-sparing thoracotomy for performing lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58,712-718[Abstract]
  5. Walker, WS Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy: the Edinburgh experience. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10,291-299[Medline]
  6. McKenna, RJ, Fischel, RJ, Wolf, R, et al Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for bronchogenic carcinoma. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10,321-325[Medline]
  7. Yim, AP, Izzat, MB, Liu, HP, et al Thoracoscopic major lung resections: an Asian perspective. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10,326-331[Medline]
  8. Kaseda, S, Aoki, T, Hangai, N, et al Better pulmonary function and prognosis with video-assisted thoracic surgery than with thoracotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70,1644-1646[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Nakata, M, Saeki, H, Yokoyama, N, et al Pulmonary function after lobectomy: video-assisted thoracic surgery vs thoracotomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70,938-941[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Nakajima, J, Takamoto, S, Kohno, T, et al Costs of videothoracoscopic surgery vs open resection for patients with of lung carcinoma. Cancer 2000;89,2497-2501[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  11. Sugiura, H, Morikawa, T, Kaji, M, et al Long-term benefits for the quality of life after video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy in patients with lung cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 1999;9,403-408[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  12. Sugi, K, Kaneda, Y, Esato, K Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy achieves a satisfactory long-term prognosis in patients with clinical stage IA lung cancer. World J Surg 2000;24,27-31[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  13. Zhao, H, Kanda, K Translation and validation of the standard Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 2000;9,129-137[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  14. Aaronson, NK, Ahmedzai, S, Bergman, B, et al The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85,365-376[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Montazeri, A, Gillis, CR, McEwen, J Quality of life in patients with lung cancer: a review of literature from 1970 to 1995. Chest 1998;113,467-481[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Bergman, B, Aaronson, NK, Ahmedzai, S, et al The EORTC QLQ-LC13: a modular supplement to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials. Eur J Cancer 1994;30A,635-642[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  17. Nomori, H, Horio, H, Naruke, T, et al What is the advantage of a thoracoscopic lobectomy over a limited thoracotomy procedure for lung cancer surgery?. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72,879-884[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Yim, AP, Landreneau, RJ, Izzat, MB, et al Is video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy a unified approach?. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66,1155-1158[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Landreneau, RJ, Mack, MJ, Hazelrigg, SR, et al Prevalence of chronic pain after pulmonary resection by thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracic surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;107,1079-1086
  20. Dales, RE, Belanger, R, Shamji, FM, et al Quality-of-life following thoracotomy for lung cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47,1443-1449[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  21. Zieren, HU, Muller, JM, Hamberger, U, et al Quality of life after surgical therapy of bronchogenic carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1996;10,233-237[Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ICVTSHome page
F. H.F. Tsang, S.-S. Chung, and A. D.L. Sihoe
Video-assisted thoracic surgery for bronchopulmonary sequestration
Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, August 1, 2006; 5(4): 424 - 426.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
M. F. Maguire, J. A. Latter, R. Mahajan, F. D. Beggs, and J. P. Duffy
A study exploring the role of intercostal nerve damage in chronic pain after thoracic surgery.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., June 1, 2006; 29(6): 873 - 879.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
M. F. Maguire, A. Ravenscroft, D. Beggs, and J. P. Duffy
A questionnaire study investigating the prevalence of the neuropathic component of chronic pain after thoracic surgery.
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2006; 29(5): 800 - 805.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ICVTSHome page
L. Solaini, F. Prusciano, P. Bagioni, and D.B. Poddie
Long-term results of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a single-centre study of 104 cases
Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, March 1, 2004; 3(1): 57 - 62.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
M. Takahama, K. Kushibe, T. Kawaguchi, M. Kimura, and S. Taniguchi
Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Is a Promising Treatment for Solitary Fibrous Tumor of the Pleura
Chest, March 1, 2004; 125(3): 1144 - 1147.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
M. K. Ferguson and A. G. Lehman
Sleeve lobectomy or pneumonectomy: optimal management strategy using decision analysis techniques
Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2003; 76(6): 1782 - 1788.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
E. Pompeo, E. De Dominicis, V. Ambrogi, D. Mineo, S. Elia, and T. C. Mineo
Quality of life after tailored combined surgery for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer and severe emphysema
Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2003; 76(6): 1821 - 1827.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
M. K. Ferguson
Optimal management when unsuspected N2 nodal disease is identified during thoracotomy for lung cancer: cost-effectiveness analysis
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2003; 126(6): 1935 - 1942.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
P. A. Fuentes
Pneumonectomy: historical perspective and prospective insight
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., April 1, 2003; 23(4): 439 - 445.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, W. W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Yim, A. P. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, W. W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Yim, A. P. C.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS