Prevalence and Impact of COVID-19 among Severe COPD Patients post Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Treatment with Endobronchial Valves.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has a great impact on numberless aspects of our society. In our bronchoscopic lung volume reduction interventional program, we work with severe COPD patients on a daily basis. OBJECTIVES: We were interested in the prevalence and outcome of COVID-19, impact of the pandemic on daily life, and the vaccination coverage in our severe COPD patients who have been treated with one-way endobronchial valves. METHOD: A questionnaire, which consisted of questions related to the infection rate, treatment, and outcome of COVID-19 infections; feelings of anxiety related to the pandemic; adherence to preventive measures; and willingness to be vaccinated; was sent to our patients in June 2021. RESULTS: The questionnaire was sent to 215 patients, and the response rate was 100%. The vaccination rate was 97% in our surveyed population. The majority of patients (63%) indicated that they were quite or very anxious to get infected with COVID-19. Twenty-five (11.5%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, with none of these patients having been vaccinated at the time of infection. The infection rate reported in this study is comparable to that of the general Dutch population. However, the hospital admission rate and mortality rates are higher. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate in severe COPD patients treated with endobronchial valves was comparable with the general population; however, the hospital admission and mortality rates were worse.

Ninety-day mortality following lung cancer surgery: outcomes from the English national clinical outcomes audit.

Accurately explaining perioperative mortality and risk to patients is an essential part of shared decision making. In the case of lung cancer surgery, the currently available multivariable mortality prediction tools perform poorly, and could mislead patients. Using data from 2004 to 2012, this group has previously produced data tables for 90-day postoperative mortality, to be used as a communication aid in the consenting process. Using National Lung Cancer Clinical Outcomes audit data from 2017 to 2018, we have produced updated early mortality tables, to reflect current thoracic surgery practice.

Early outcomes of lung resections in non-small cell lung cancer after COVID-19 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: There is limited literature on patients with a history of COVID-19 pneumonia who underwent anatomical lung resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was aimed to share the early postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent lung resection after COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 30 patients who underwent lobectomy with thoracotomy and systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection due to NSCLC in a single center between November 2018 and September 2021. The patients were divided into two groups regarding COVID-19 pneumonia history; the COVID-19 group consisted of 14 patients (46.7%) and the non-COVID-19 group 16 (53.3%) patients. The patients' age, gender, comorbidity, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) value, tumor type and size, resection type, postoperative air leak duration, total drainage volume, drain removal time, postoperative complications, and length of stay (LOS) were recorded. RESULTS: 9 (30%) patients were female, and 21 (70%) were male. The mean age was 62.1 ± 8.91 years. Our comparison of postoperative air leak duration, total drainage volume, time to drain removal, postoperative complications, and LOS between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups revealed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: Anatomical lung resection can be performed safely in NSCLC patients with a history of COVID-19 pneumonia without significant difference in early postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Pre-COVID-19 National Mortality Trends in Open and Video-Assisted Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In the current era of episode-based hospital reimbursements, it is important to determine the impact of hospital size on contemporary national trends in surgical technique and outcomes of lobectomy. METHODS: Patients aged >18 y undergoing open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy from 2008 to 2014 were identified using insurance claims data from the National Inpatient Sample. The impact of hospital size on surgical approach and outcomes for both open and VATS lobectomy were analyzed. RESULTS: Over the 7-y period, 202,668 lobectomies were performed nationally, including 71,638 VATS and 131,030 open. Although the overall number of lobectomies decreased (30,058 in 2008 versus 27,340 in 2014, P < 0.01), the proportion of VATS lobectomies increased (24.0% versus 46.9%), and open lobectomies decreased (76.0% versus 53.0%, all P < 0.01). When stratified by hospital size, small hospitals had a significant increase in the proportion of open lobectomies (6.4%-12.2%; P = 0.01) and trend toward increased number of VATS lobectomies (2.7%-12.2%). Annual mortality rates for VATS (range: 1.0%-1.9%) and open (range: 1.9%-2.4%) lobectomy did not significantly differ over time (all P > 0.05) but did decrease among small hospitals (4.1%-1.3% and 5.1%-1.1% for VATS and open, respectively; both P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounders, hospital bed size was not a predictor of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of VATS lobectomies has increased over time, more so among small hospitals. Mortality rates for open lobectomy remain consistently higher than VATS lobectomy (range 0.4%-1.4%) but did not significantly differ over time. This data can help benchmark hospital performance in the future.

Comparative early results of a robotics-assisted endoscope holder in single port thoracoscopic surgery in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in surgical instruments have made single-port surgery more widely accepted and lead to a reduced demand for surgical assistants. As COVID-19 has ravaged the world, maintaining minimum medical staffing requirements and proper social distancing have become major topics of interest. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of applying the unisurgeon approach in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery aided by a robotic camera holder. METHODS: Operative time, blood loss, setup time, postoperative hospital stays, and the number of participating surgeons in single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resections were gathered for investigation after the introduction of the ENDOFIXexo robotic endoscope holder system. In this cohort, we collected 213 patients who underwent single port video thoracoscope surgery, including 57 patients underwent robotic endoscope arm assisted surgery and case-matched 52 patients in the robotic arm-assisted group with patients in the human-assisted group through propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: In wedge resection, a single surgeon was able to completely operate on all lobes of target lesions. However, for anatomical resections, namely segmentectomy, the success rate was 95%, and for lobectomy, the success rate was only 64%. No significant differences between setup times, blood loss, or operative times between the two groups were observed. CONCLUSIONS: When an experienced uniport surgeon is assisted by a robotic endoscope holder, wedge resection is the most suitable procedure to be performed through unisurgeon single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery without increasing setup time, operative time, or short-term complications. Verification of the technique's applicability for use in anatomic resections requires further investigation.

Critical care for lung cancer patients: surgical treatment during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, some factors have led to changes in the management of patients with lung cancer. In our study, we aimed to present our surgical treatment approach to patients with NSCLC during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for NSCLC in our thoracic surgery clinic between March 2020 and March 2021 were evaluated retrospectively. The patients operated on were retrospectively evaluated in terms of sex, age, tumor staging, lung resection type, histopathological type, COVID-19 status, length of stay, complications, and mortality. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients, 27 men and 8 women, underwent surgery for lung cancer. The 2 most common types of surgery were lobectomy (in 32 patients) and pneumonectomy (in 3 patients). According to cancer staging based on 8th TNM, 14 patients were stage 2B, 12 patients were stage 2A, and 9 patients were stage 3A. The morbidity rate was 14 %. No postoperative mortality was observed. Nine patients had a history of COVID- 19 before surgery. No significant difference was found in terms of complications in patients with a preoperative history of COVID-19. In the postoperative period, COVID-19 was observed in no patient in our clinic. CONCLUSION: We think that surgical treatments should not be postponed for diseases such as lung cancer, where the mortality rate is high and early diagnosis and treatment are very important. There will be no delay or inadequacy in the treatment of patients if the rules determined during the COVID-19 pandemic and other types of pandemic possibly occurring in the future are followed (Tab. 1, Ref. 23).

Starting the first robotic lobectomy program in the Eastern Europe during Coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: We report our experience in starting RATS (robotic-assisted thoracic surgery) lobectomy program during COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data from 20 consecutive cases undergoing RATS lobectomy between August 2020 and April 2021 were prospectively accumulated into our database. RESULTS: The mean operational time was 235±69 minutes (median 210, range 175 to 370). Conversion-to-open rate was 5 %. One patient was converted to an open procedure during surgery due to surgical bleeding. One patient (5 %), with sever chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), had prolonged air leak with chest drainage 11 days and conservative treatment. Morbidity rate was 10 % (2 patients). Estimated costs of RATS lobectomy in our department were $9,590 (range $8,250-$12,730). 30-days mortality was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Safe robotic surgery is based not only on improved robotic equipment, but also on good technical skills and medical knowledge. It requires training of the entire operating room team. The learning curve is steep, involving port placement, use of the correct robotic arms, availability of the proper instrumentation, and proper patient positioning (Tab. 2, Ref. 28).

Lung Cancer Surgery With Persistent COVID-19 Infection.

A 71-year-old man with a history of drug-induced interstitial pneumonia was diagnosed with COVID-19 infection and simultaneously found to have a pulmonary mass, suggesting a coexisting lung cancer. Approximately 1 month after COVID-19 pneumonia resolved, the patient electively underwent right upper lobectomy. Postoperatively, acute exacerbation of interstitial pneumonia occurred and the patient died on the fifteenth postoperative day. By quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, high levels of COVID-19-derived RNA were detected in the specimen of lung parenchyma. Despite resolved COVID-19 infection, it may persist locally in the lungs, with the risk of acute exacerbation of interstitial pneumonia due to secondary stressors including surgery.

Powered articulation by the SigniaTM stapling system for stapling position adjustments: optimizing safe surgical margins in thoracoscopic sublobar resection.

Accumulation of experience and advances in techniques and instruments have enabled surgeons to perform video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) safely for sublobar resection, including segmentectomy and wedge resection. A key to successful VATS sublobar resection is to have adequate resection margins and the appropriate use of articulated surgical staplers is essential for this purpose. The SigniaTM stapling system (Covidien Japan, Tokyo) has been used extensively in the fields of thoracic surgery. Its features include high maneuverability with fully powered articulation, rotation, clamping, and firing, which the surgeon can control with one hand. We introduce the "sliding technique" using the SigniaTM system, which allows for adjustment of the resection lines of the pulmonary parenchyma to optimize safe surgical margins with minimal stapler movement, and without repetitively moving the stapler in and out of the pleural cavity, during VATS sublobar resection.

Salvage pulmonary resection in stages IIIb-IV lung cancer after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors case series and literature review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The role of salvage thoracic surgery in managing advanced-stage lung cancer following treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors is currently unclear. We present a series of nine patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who underwent pulmonary resection following treatment with pembrolizumab. METHODS: We performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of pulmonary resection undertaken following treatment with pembrolizumab for advanced-stage lung cancer. Nine patients met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: In six cases, surgery was indicated for persistent localized disease after treatment, and in three cases for nonresponsive synchronous/metachronous lung nodules while on treatment for stage IV lung cancer. Dense hilar fibrosis was present in all patients. Minimal access surgery was achieved in five cases (video-assisted n = 2, robotic-assisted n = 3). There was no in-hospital mortality. One patient died within 60 days from community-acquired COVID-19 pneumonitis. Seven patients remain free of disease between 5 and 22 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary resection is safe and technically feasible following treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Surgical challenges relate to postimmunotherapy fibrosis, but with increased experience and a robotic approach, minimal access surgery is achievable. Further prospective studies are required to assess the surgical impact on disease control and overall survival in this patient cohort.

Lung Cancer Surgery in the Early Phase After Acute COVID-19 Pneumonitis.

A 65-year-old woman was diagnosed with early-stage lung cancer in 2020 and scheduled for robotic assisted-left upper lobectomy. Unfortunately, the patient contracted symptomatic COVID-19, resulting in postponement of lung resection. She was admitted for surgery 6 weeks after the acute infection. A preoperative computed tomographic scan showed widespread interstitial pneumonitis. However, the operation went ahead given concerns over tumor progression, albeit with a lesser resection to preserve lung tissue because the patient was slightly hypoxic. Her postoperative recovery was uneventful, and she was discharged 5 days later. Final histology confirmed a fully resected stage T1c N0 M0 adenocarcinoma of the lung.

Lobectomy with pathological examination in lung cancer patients who recovered from COVID-19.

We present two cases of lobectomy in lung cancer patients who recovered from COVID-19 before surgical treatment. In both cases, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery was initiated and hilar fibrosis was detected; as a result, conversion was performed in one case. There were no postoperative complications and mortality. Also, we demonstrate the results of pathological examination in patients who have recovered from COVID-19.

Severity of COVID-19 in patients with lung cancer: evidence and challenges.

Cancer patients are highly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infections due to frequent contacts with the healthcare system, immunocompromised state from cancer or its therapies, supportive medications such as steroids and most importantly their advanced age and comorbidities. Patients with lung cancer have consistently been reported to suffer from an increased risk of death compared with other cancers. This is possibly due to the combination of specific pathophysiological aspects, including underlying pulmonary compromise due to smoking history and the increased specific pressures on respiratory healthcare services caused by the related pandemic. Rationally and safely treating patients with lung cancer during the pandemic has become a continuous challenge over the last year. Deciding whether to offer, modify, postpone or even cancel treatments for this particular patient's population has become the crucial recurrent dilemma for lung cancer professionals. Chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted agents represent distinct risks factors in the context of COVID-19 that should be balanced with the short-term and long-term consequences of delaying cancer care. Despite the rapid and persistent trend of the pandemic, declared by WHO on March 11, 2020, and still ongoing at the time of writing (January 2021), various efforts were made by oncologists worldwide to understand the impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer. Adapted recommendations of our evidence-based practice guidelines have been developed for all stakeholders. Different small and large-scale registries, such as the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) and Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration quickly collected data, supporting cancer care decisions under the challenging circumstance created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Several recommendations were developed as guidance for prioritizing the various aspects of lung cancer care in order to mitigate the adverse effects of the COVID-19 healthcare crisis, potentially reducing the morbidity and mortality of our patients from COVID-19 and from cancer. These recommendations helped inform decisions about treatment of established disease, continuation of clinical research and lung cancer screening. In this review, we summarize available evidence regarding the direct and indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on lung cancer care and patients.

Simultaneous versus staged resections for bilateral pulmonary metastases.

BACKGROUND: For patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases, staged resections have historically been the preferred surgical intervention. During the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic made patient travel to the hospital challenging and necessitated reduction in operative volume so that resources could be conserved. We report our experience with synchronous bilateral metastasectomies for the treatment of disease in both lungs. METHODS: Patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases who underwent simultaneous bilateral resections were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent staged resections. We used nearest-neighbor propensity score (1:1) matching to adjust for confounders. Perioperative outcomes were compared between groups using paired statistical analysis techniques. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2020, 36 patients underwent bilateral simultaneous metastasectomies. We matched 31 pairs of patients. The length of stay was significantly shorter in patients undergoing simultaneous resection (median 3 vs. 8 days, p < .001) and operative time was shorter (156 vs. 235.5 min, p < .001) when compared to the sum of both procedures in the staged group. The groups did not significantly differ with regard to postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: In a carefully selected patient population, simultaneous bilateral metastasectomy is a safe option. A single procedure confers benefits for both the patient as well as the hospital resource system.

Salvage Lobectomy to Treat Necrotizing SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia Complicated by a Bronchopleural Fistula.

We report a case of necrotizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia complicated by a bronchopleural fistula and treated by decortication and salvage lobectomy. Owing to the unknown characteristics of the underlying SARS-CoV-2 infection, treatment of the abscess and bronchopleural fistula was delayed. This may have resulted in further deterioration of the patient, with ensuing multiple organ dysfunction. Complications of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, such as a bacterial abscess and a bronchopleural fistula, should be treated as if the patient were not infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Simulation and Measurement of Aerosolisation in Different Chest Drainage Systems.

The aim of the study was to assess the degree of aerosolisation in different chest drainage systems according to different air leak volumes, in a simulated environment. This novel simulation model was designed to produce an air leak by passing air through and agitating a fluorescent fluid. The air leak volume and amount of fluorescent fluid were tested in various combinations and aerosolisation was assessed at 10-minute intervals using the ultraviolet light. The following chest drainage systems were compared: (1) single-chamber chest drainage system, (2) 3-compartment wet-dry suction chest drainage system, (3) digital drainage and monitoring system. The impact of suction (-2 and -4 kPa) in generating aerosolised particles was tested as well. A total number of 187 of 10-minute interval measurements were performed. The single-chamber chest drainage system generated the largest number of aerosolised particles at different air leak volumes and drainage output. The 3-compartment wet-dry suction system and the digital drainage and monitoring system did not generate any identifiable aerosolised particles at any of the air leak or drain output volumes considered. Suction applied to the chest drainage systems did not have an effect on aerosolisation. Aerosol generation in the simulated air-leak model demonstrated the potential risk of SARS-CoV-2 spread in the clinical setting. Full personal protective equipment must be used in patients with an air leak. Single-chamber chest drainage system generates the highest rate of aerosolised particles and it should not be used as an open system in patients with an air leak.