Original Article
Preliminary results of single-port versus triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer
Abstract
Objective: To compare the feasibility and safety of single-port vs. triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 82 patients with NSCLC who underwent complete thoracoscopic lobectomy from August 2014 to October 2014 in Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. There were 33 cases in single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy group (singleport group) and the other 49 ones in triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy group (triple-port group). Total lymph node harvest, mediastinal lymph node harvest, dissection of mediastinal lymph node groups, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, chest drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative one-day pain visual analogue scale (POP-VAS), and the complications were thoroughly compared between the two groups.
Results: There were no significant differences in total lymph node harvest, mediastinal lymph node harvest, dissection of mediastinal lymph node groups, intraoperative blood loss, chest drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, and complications between the two groups (P>0.05). However, the operation time of single-port group was significantly longer than that of triple-port group (181.3±27.5 vs. 149.5±30.9 min, P<0.05). POP-VAS in single-port group was significantly lower than that in triple-port group (3.6±0.7 vs. 5.5±1.0, P<0.05).
Conclusions: For NSCLC, the feasibility and safety of single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy is similar to triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy. Compared with triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy, the operation time of single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy is longer, but its postoperative pain is gentler. As the experience accumulating, single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy should be popularized with its merits of minimal invasiveness.
Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 82 patients with NSCLC who underwent complete thoracoscopic lobectomy from August 2014 to October 2014 in Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. There were 33 cases in single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy group (singleport group) and the other 49 ones in triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy group (triple-port group). Total lymph node harvest, mediastinal lymph node harvest, dissection of mediastinal lymph node groups, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, chest drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative one-day pain visual analogue scale (POP-VAS), and the complications were thoroughly compared between the two groups.
Results: There were no significant differences in total lymph node harvest, mediastinal lymph node harvest, dissection of mediastinal lymph node groups, intraoperative blood loss, chest drainage duration, postoperative hospital stay, and complications between the two groups (P>0.05). However, the operation time of single-port group was significantly longer than that of triple-port group (181.3±27.5 vs. 149.5±30.9 min, P<0.05). POP-VAS in single-port group was significantly lower than that in triple-port group (3.6±0.7 vs. 5.5±1.0, P<0.05).
Conclusions: For NSCLC, the feasibility and safety of single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy is similar to triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy. Compared with triple-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy, the operation time of single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy is longer, but its postoperative pain is gentler. As the experience accumulating, single-port complete thoracoscopic lobectomy should be popularized with its merits of minimal invasiveness.
