4.6 Article

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index Score of Two or More

Journal

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 56-61

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181c0a5ea

Keywords

Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS); Non-small cell lung cancer; Lobectomy; Comorbidity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: We evaluated the feasibility and safety of the video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients with comorbidity. Methods: Between April 2000 and December 2006, a prospective database of 58 consecutive patients undergoing a VATS lobectomy for NSCLC, who had a Charlson comorbidity index score of 2 or more, was retrospectively analyzed. The demographic, perioperative, histopathologic, and outcome variables, including the recurrence and survival, were assessed. Results: The VATS lobectomy was successfully performed in 57 patients (16 women and 41 men; median age, 70 years). Twenty-three patients (40.4%) were aged 75 years or older. The total score of the Charlson comorbidity index was as follows: 2 in 26 patients, 3 in 13 patients, 4 in 12 patients, 5 in five patients, and 6 in one patient. None of the patients required a blood transfusion during surgery or during the postoperative course. We observed no intraoperative or in-hospital deaths, and no complications occurred in the 45 patients (78.9%). At a median follow-up of 34 months, a recurrence was observed in five patients who had advanced stages: a local recurrence in one and a distant recurrence in four. The overall 5-year survival rates for postoperative stage IA (n = 25) and IB (n 16) were 100% and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: We believe that a VATS lobectomy is a feasible and safe procedure for NSCLC in patients with comorbidity because this modality demonstrates an acceptable morbidity and a favorable oncologic outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available