EJCTS Click here for details of sales representative
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009;36:469-474. doi:10.1016/j.ejcts.2009.03.050
Copyright © 2009, European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier. All rights reserved.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Apostolos Nakas
Michael N. Klimatsidas
Antonio E. Martin-Ucar
David A. Waller
Right arrow Permission Requests
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nakas, A.
Right arrow Articles by Waller, D. A.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Nakas, A.
Right arrow Articles by Waller, D. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - cancer

Video-assisted versus open pulmonary metastasectomy: the surgeon's finger or the radiologist's eye?

Apostolos Nakasa, Michael N. Klimatsidasa, James Entwisleb, Antonio E. Martin-Ucara, David A. Wallera,*

a Department of Thoracic Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
b Department of Radiology, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK

Received 13 September 2008; received in revised form 10 March 2009; accepted 23 March 2009.

* Corresponding author. Address: Department of Thoracic Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK. Tel.: +44 116 2563959; fax: +44 116 2563139. (Email: david.waller{at}uhl-tr.nhs.uk).

Objective: The use of VATS metastasectomy remains controversial because of doubt surrounding its ability to remove palpable but CT occult lesions. We aim to evaluate our policy of elective VATS and compare it with our results with open metastasectomy. Methods: Pulmonary metastasectomy was performed for metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma in 52 patients: 27 open and 25 VATS over 8 years. The age and sex distribution was similar: median age was 66 for open and 69 years for VATS, p = 0.48, 70% male in open and 64% male in VATS, p = 0.31. Liver metastases were present in 37% in the open and 32% in the VATS group, p = 0.46. The choice of surgical approach was dependent on the distance of the lesion from the surface of the lung. We examined the survival using the Kaplan–Meier method and we tested for differences in the incidence of missed lesions, pulmonary disease progression and repeat metastasectomy. Results: There was no in-hospital mortality. There was no difference in the incidence of missed lesions (1 in VATS, none in open, p = 0.48), pulmonary disease progression (11 in open, 9 in VATS, p = 0.47) or recurrence in the same lobe (4 in open, 3 in VATS, p = 0.54). Median follow-up was 22 (1–70) months and there was no difference to the estimated actuarial survival. Mean survival for the open group was 47 months, SE 6 with 95% CI 36–59 months and mean survival for the VATS group 35.4 months, SE 3 with 95% CI 30–41.3 months. The estimated 1- and 2-year survival was 90% and 80% for open and 90% and 72% for VATS. Conclusions: The selective use of VATS therapeutic metastasectomy in conjunction with multi-detector CT is justified in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. The insertion of the surgical digit is not mandatory. Trust the radiologist's eye.

Key Words: Pulmonary metastases • Video-assisted thoracic surgery • Metastasectomy







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
Copyright © 2009 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier. All rights reserved.