Extrapleural pneumonectomy versus pleurectomy/decortication in the surgical management of malignant pleural mesothelioma: Results in 663 patients

ObjectiveThe optimal procedure for resection of malignant pleural mesothelioma is controversial, partly because previous analyses include small numbers of patients. We performed a multi-institutional study to increase statistical power to detect significant differences in outcome between extrapleural pneumonectomy and pleurectomy/decortication.MethodsPatients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who underwent extrapleural pneumonectomy or pleurectomy/decortication at 3 institutions were identified. Survival and prognostic factors were analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards analysis.ResultsFrom 1990 to 2006, 663 consecutive patients (538 men and 125 women) underwent resection. The median age was 63 years (range, 26–93 years). The operative mortality was 7% for extrapleural pneumonectomy (n = 27/385) and 4% for pleurectomy/decortication (n = 13/278). Significant survival differences were seen for American Joint Committee on Cancer stages 1 to 4 (P < .001), epithelioid versus non-epithelioid histology (P < .001), extrapleural pneumonectomy versus pleurectomy/decortication (P < .001), multimodality therapy versus surgery alone (P < .001), and gender (P < .001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a hazard rate of 1.4 for extrapleural pneumonectomy (P < .001) controlling for stage, histology, gender, and multimodality therapy.ConclusionPatients who underwent pleurectomy/decortication had a better survival than those who underwent extrapleural pneumonectomy; however, the reasons are multifactorial and subject to selection bias. At present, the choice of resection should be tailored to the extent of disease, patient comorbidities, and type of multimodality therapy planned

Distinct Clinical Course of EGFR-Mutant Resected Lung Cancers: Results of Testing of 1118 Surgical Specimens and Effects of Adjuvant Gefitinib and Erlotinib

Background:EGFR and KRAS mutations are mutually exclusive and predict outcomes with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment in patients with stage IV lung cancers. The clinical significance of these mutations in patients with resected stage I–III lung cancers is unclear.Methods:At our institution, resection specimens from patients with stage I–III lung adenocarcinomas are tested for the presence of EGFR or KRAS mutations during routine pathology analysis such that the results are available before consideration of adjuvant therapy. In a cohort of 1118 patients tested over 8 years, overall survival was analyzed using multivariate analysis to control for potential confounders, including age, sex, stage, and smoking history. The impact of adjuvant erlotinib or gefitinib was examined in an independent data set of patients exclusively with EGFR mutation, in which date of recurrence was recorded.Results:In the overall population, we identified 227 KRAS (25%) and 222 EGFR (20%) mutations. Patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers had a lower risk of death compared with those without EGFR mutations, overall survival (OS) HR 0.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34–0.76, p < 0.001). Patients with KRAS-mutant lung cancers had similar outcomes compared with individuals with KRAS wild-type tumors, OS HR 1.17 (95% CI: 0.87–1.57, p = 0.30). A separate data set includes only patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancers identified over 10 years (n = 286). In patients with resected lung cancers and EGFR mutation, treatment with adjuvant erlotinib or gefitinib was associated with a lower risk of recurrence or death, disease-free survival HR 0.43 (95% CI: 0.26–0.72, p = 0.001), and a trend toward improved OS.Conclusions:Patients with resected stage I–III lung cancers and EGFR mutation have a lower risk of death compared with patients without EGFR mutation. This may be because of treatment with EGFR TKIs. Patients with, and without KRAS mutation have similar OS. These data support reflex testing of resected lung adenocarcinomas for EGFR mutation to provide prognostic information and identify patients for enrollment on prospective clinical trials of adjuvant EGFR TKIs

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy: Catastrophic intraoperative complications

ObjectiveLarge case series have demonstrated that video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy is feasible and safe. However, catastrophic intraoperative complications during VATS lobectomy requiring thoracotomy can be overlooked and are not reported in the current literature. We reviewed our experience to determine the frequency, management, and outcome of these complications.MethodsA systematic review of a prospective database was performed after institutional review board approval. All patients who underwent VATS lobectomy or a combination of any VATS procedure plus a thoracotomy were identified. A catastrophic complication was defined as an event that resulted in an additional unplanned major surgical procedure other than the planned lobectomy.ResultsFrom 2002 to 2010, a total of 633 VATS lobectomies were performed and 610 patients had any VATS procedure plus a thoracotomy. Thirteen catastrophic complications were identified in 12 (1%) patients. We included all cases in which a VATS was performed as well as a thoractomy since this would include conversions as well. These cases included 3 main pulmonary arterial and 1 main pulmonary venous transection requiring reanastomosis, 3 unplanned pneumonectomies, 1 unplanned bilobectomy, 1 tracheoesophageal fistula, 1 membranous airway injury to the bronchus intermedius, 1 complete staple line disruption of the inferior pulmonary vein injury to the azygos/superior vena cava junction, and 1 splenectomy. There were no intraoperative deaths.ConclusionsCatastrophic intraoperative complications of VATS lobectomy are uncommon. However, awareness of the possibility of such injuries is critical to avoid them, and development of specific management strategies is necessary to limit morbidity should they occur