Completely resected N1 non–small cell lung cancer: Factors affecting recurrence and long-term survival

ObjectiveN1 disease in non–small cell lung cancer represents a heterogeneous patient subgroup with a 5-year survival of approximately 40%. Few reports have evaluated the correlation between N1 disease and tumor recurrence or which subgroup of patients would most benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsFrom 1997 through 2002, all patients with pathologic T1-4 N1 M0 non–small cell lung cancer who had a complete resection with systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy were retrospectively analyzed and evaluated for factors associated with recurrence and long-term survival.ResultsOne hundred eighty patients with N1 disease were evaluated. Sixty-six (37%) patients had either locoregional recurrence (n = 39 [22%]), distant metastasis (n = 41 [23%]), or both during follow-up. Univariate analysis demonstrated that visceral pleural invasion and age were associated with locoregional recurrence, whereas visceral pleural invasion, distinct N1 metastasis (as opposed to direct N1 invasion by the primary tumor), and multistation lymph node involvement were associated with distant metastasis (P < .05). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that visceral pleural invasion, multistation N1 involvement, and distinct N1 metastasis were the only independent predisposing factors for locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. Overall 5-year survival was 42.5%. Survival was significantly decreased by advanced pathologic T classification (P = .015), visceral pleural invasion (P < .0001), and higher tumor grade (P = .014).ConclusionsIn patients with N1-positive non–small cell lung cancer, visceral pleural invasion, multistation N1 disease, and distinct N1 metastasis are independent predictors of subsequent locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. Advanced T classification, visceral pleural invasion, and higher tumor grade were predictors of poor survival. These patients represent a subgroup of patients with N1 disease who might benefit from additional therapy, including adjuvant chemotherapy

The impact of the lung allocation score on short-term transplantation outcomes: A multicenter study

ObjectiveThe lung allocation score restructured the distribution of scarce donor lungs for transplantation. The algorithm ranks waiting list patients according to medical urgency and expected benefit after transplantation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the lung allocation score on short-term outcomes after lung transplantation.MethodsA multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed with data from 5 academic medical centers. Results of patients undergoing transplantation on the basis of the lung allocation score (May 4, 2005 to May 3, 2006) were compared with those of patients receiving transplants the preceding year before the lung allocation score was implemented (May 4, 2004, to May 3, 2005).ResultsThe study reports on 341 patients (170 before the lung allocation score and 171 after). Waiting time decreased from 680.9 ± 528.3 days to 445.6 ± 516.9 days (P < .001). Recipient diagnoses changed with an increase in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and a decrease in emphysema and cystic fibrosis (P = .002). Postoperatively, primary graft dysfunction increased from 14.1% (24/170) to 22.9% (39/171) (P = .04) and intensive care unit length of stay increased from 5.7 ± 6.7 days to 7.8 ± 9.6 days (P = .04). Hospital mortality and 1-year survival were the same between groups (5.3% vs 5.3% and 90% vs 89%, respectively; P > .6)ConclusionsThis multicenter retrospective review of short-term outcomes supports the fact that the lung allocation score is achieving its objectives. The lung allocation score reduced waiting time and altered the distribution of lung diseases for which transplantation was done on the basis of medical necessity. After transplantation, recipients have significantly higher rates of primary graft dysfunction and intensive care unit lengths of stay. However, hospital mortality and 1-year survival have not been adversely affected

Effect of Massage on Pain Management for Thoracic Surgery Patients

Background: Integrative therapies such as massage have gained support as interventions that improve the overall patient experience during hospitalization. Thoracic surgery patients undergo long procedures and commonly have postoperative back, neck, and shoulder pain. Purpose: Given the promising effects of massage therapy for alleviation of pain, we studied the effectiveness and feasibility of massage therapy delivered in the postoperative thoracic surgery setting. Methods: Patients who received massage in the postoperative setting had pain scores evaluated pre and post massage on a rating scale of 0 to 10 (0 = no pain, 10 = worst possible pain). Results: In total, 160 patients completed the pilot study and received massage therapy that was individualized. Patients receiving massage therapy had significantly decreased pain scores after massage (p < .001), and patients’ comments were very favorable. Patients and staff were highly satisfied with having massage therapy available, and no major barriers to implementing massage therapy were identified. Conclusions: Massage therapy may be an important additional pain management component of the healing experience for patients after thoracic surgery

Intensive care unit utilization and outcome after esophagectomy

Objective: To establish the frequency of intensive care unit (ICU) admission after esophagectomy and to determine the associated outcomes. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Participants: Four hundred thirty-two patients who underwent esophagectomy between January 2000 and June 2004. Interventions: None Measurements and Main Results: Data relating to demographics, patient co-morbidities, perioperative management, complications, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III variables were abstracted. Statistical analyses were performed to compare survivors with non-survivors and ICU patients with non-ICU patients. Of 432 patients included in the study, 123 (28.5%) were admitted to the ICU. Arrhythmias, new infiltrates on chest radiograph, and documented aspiration were common reasons for ICU admission. Patients admitted to ICU were of high acuity (mean APACHE III score 54.5, mean prediction of ICU death 6.4%). Of 352 patients originally not sent to the ICU, 43 (12.2%) were subsequently admitted to the ICU, often for aspiration. Overall in-hospital mortality was 3.7% (16 of 432 patients). Fifteen of the 123 ICU patients (12.2%) did not survive to hospital discharge. Conclusions: A significant minority of patients will require ICU admission after esophagectomy, often for aspiration pneumonitis and arrhythmias. Despite high severity of illness scores, the perioperative mortality rate for patients after esophagectomy at a high-volume center is low

Pulmonary Metastasectomy A Survey of Current Practice Amongst Members of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Objective: Currently, no randomized trials exist to guide thoracic Surgeons in the field of pulmonary metastasectomy. This Study investigates the current clinical practice among European Society of Thoracic Surgeon (ESTS) members. Methods: A Web-based questionnaire was created exploring the clinical approach to lung metastasectomy. All ESTS members were surveyed. Results: One hundred forty-six complete responses were received from the 494 consultant ESTS members surveyed (29.6%). For most respondents (68%), lung metastasectomy represents a minor proportion (0-10%) of their clinical volume. Approximately 90% of respondents always/usually review their lung metastasectomy cases within a multidisciplinary meeting. Helical computed tomography is most commonly used (74%) for the detection of metastases, while positron emission tomography is used additionally in less than 50%. Most of respondents (92% and 74%, respectively) consider unresectable primary tumor and predicted incomplete metastasectomy as absolute contraindications to lung metastasectomy. The most frequently performed resection is wedge excision (92%). Palpation of the lung is considered necessary by 65%, while 40% use a thoracoscopic approach with therapeutic intent. Though 65% consider pathologically positive nodes a contraindication to metastasectomy, a similar number rarely/never perform mediastinoscopy before metastasectomy. At the time of metastasectomy 55% perform mediastinal lymph node sampling whereas 33% perform no nodal dissection whatsoever. Conclusions: The survey provides a large, time-sensitive database summarizing the clinical practice of pulmonary metastasectomy by members of the ESTS. Responses demonstrate a remarkable consistency of practice patterns, though certain areas of potential controversy showed greater variance. Conceivably, these divergent approaches will encourage future collaborative studies aimed at identifying evidence-based practices for patients with Pulmonary metastases