Efficacy comparison of single utility port and multiple utility ports thoracoscopic lobectomy for peripheral lung cancer
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-9801.2018.01.008
- VernacularTitle:胸腔镜单操作孔与多操作孔肺叶切除术治疗周围型肺癌效果比较
- Author:
Chengguang HU
1
;
Jianhong LIAN
;
Shiping GUO
;
Diansong MA
;
Kang ZHENG
;
Guanhua LIU
;
Zhilong LI
;
Yanyan MA
;
Yanli ZHAO
Author Information
1. 山西医科大学附属肿瘤医院 山西省肿瘤医院特需病房
- Keywords:
Lung neoplasms;
Thoracic surgical procedures;
Thoracoscope;
Single utility port
- From:
Cancer Research and Clinic
2018;30(1):38-42
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of single utility port and multiple utility ports thoracoscopic lobectomy in the treatment of peripheral lung cancer, and to study the operation skills, relative merit and feasibility of the single utility port thoracoscopic lobectomy. Methods The clinical data was analyzed retrospectively for 223 cases with stage Ⅰ orⅡ of peripheral lung cancer who underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy from July 2011 to November 2014 in Shanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital. Among 223 cases, 78 cases received single utility port thoracoscopic lobectomy (single utility port group), 145 cases received 2 or 3 utility ports thoracoscopic lobectomy (multiple utility ports group). The clinical outcomes involved time of operation, intraoperative blood loss,chest drainage, postoperative hospital stay, stations of lymph node dissection, numbers of lymph node dissection, rate of turn to open, postoperative complications, 2-year survival rate and disease free survival rate. Results No perioperative death occurred in both groups. There was no statistical difference between single utility port group and multiple utility ports group in operation time [(157.4 ±13.6) min vs. (151.3 ±23.2) min], intraoperative blood loss [(180.77 ±59.97) ml vs.(171.31 ±77.51) ml],chest drainage [(370.26 ±146.09) ml vs. (351.17 ±159.07) ml], lymph node dissection stations (4.29±0.65 vs. 4.21±0.73), lymph node dissection number (11.50±2.30 vs. 11.04±2.29), rate of turn to open [(5.13 ％ (4/78) vs. 4.83 ％ (7/145)], incidence of postoperative complications [17.95 ％ (14/78) vs. 15.86％(23/145)], postoperative hospital stay [(8.74±0.51) d vs. (9.48±0.63) d], 2-year survival rate [96.15 ％(75/78) vs. 93.79％(136/145)] and 2-year disease free survival rate [80.77 ％ (63/78) vs. 82.07 ％ (119/145)] (all P>0.05). Conclusions The single utility port thoracoscopic lobectomy could achieve the same clinical results as the multiple utility ports. The single utility port thoracoscopic lobectomy is a safe, effective and feasible surgical procedure.
