Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Cancers (Basel) ; 15(2)2023 Jan 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36672363

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of thoracoscopic lobectomy for advanced stage III NSCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 205 consecutive patients who underwent VATS or open lobectomy for clinical stage III lung cancer between January 2013 and December 2020. The perioperative and oncologic outcomes of the two approaches were compared. Long-term survival was assessed using the Kaplan−Meier estimator. Propensity score-matched (PSM) comparisons were used to obtain a well-balanced cohort of patients undergoing VATS and open lobectomy. Results: VATS lobectomy was performed in 77 (37.6%) patients and open lobectomy in 128 (62.4%) patients. Twelve patients (15.6%) converted from VATS to the open approach. PSM resulted in 64 cases in each group, which were well matched according to twelve potential prognostic factors, including tumor size, histology, and pTNM stage. Between the VATS and the open group, there were no significant differences in unmatched and matched analyses, respectively, of the overall postoperative complications (p = 0.138 vs. p = 0.109), chest tube duration (p = 0.311 vs. p = 0.106), or 30-day mortality (p = 1 vs. p = 1). However, VATS was associated with shorter hospital stays (p < 0.0001). The five-year overall survival (OS) and five-year Recurrence-free survival (RFS) were comparable between the VATS and the open groups. There was no significant difference in the recurrence pattern between the two groups in both the unmatched and matched analyses. Conclusion: For the advanced stage III NSCLC, VATS lobectomy achieved equivalent postoperative and oncologic outcomes when compared with open lobectomy without increasing the risk of procedure-related locoregional recurrence.

2.
J Endovasc Ther ; : 15266028221116747, 2022 Aug 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35927926

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate early and medium-term outcomes of double fenestrated physician-modified endovascular grafts for total endovascular aortic arch repair. METHODS: This single-center retrospective analysis of prospectively-collected data included 100 patients, from January 2017 to December 2021, undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for zone 0. The fenestrations were a proximal larger fenestration that incorporated the brach2iocephalic trunk and left common carotid artery and a distal smaller fenestration for the left subclavian artery (LSA). Only the LSA fenestration was stented. RESULTS: The median duration for stent-graft modification was 23±6 minutes. Of the 100 patients, 70 were men. The mean patient age was 70±10.5 years. Indications for treatment included degenerative aortic arch aneurysm (n=32), dissecting aortic arch aneurysm after type A dissections (n=23) and (n=19) after type B dissections, acute complicated type B dissection (n=16), and other pathologies (n=10). Technical success rate was 97%. The 30 day mortality was 2% (n=2). Four patients (4%) had minor stroke with full recovery. One patient (1%) had a type IA endoleak, 1 patient (1%) had a type IB endoleak, and 2 patients (2%) have a type II endoleak from the LSA. Eight patients (8%) required reintervention: 1 type IA endoleak, 1 type IB endoleak, 1 retrograde type A dissection, and 5 because of access-related complications. During a mean follow-up of 24±7.2 months, there were no aortic rupture, paraplegia, and all supra-aortic trunks were patent. CONCLUSIONS: Double homemade fenestrated TEVAR is both feasible and effective for total endovascular aortic arch repair avoiding the need for anatomical and extra-anatomical surgical revascularization. The long-term durability will need to be assessed in studies with long-term follow-up. CLINICAL IMPACT: Double homemade fenestrated TEVAR is effective for total endovascular aortic arch repair avoiding the need for anatomical and extra-anatomical surgical revascularization. The standout feature of this double fenestrated device is its simple handling during operation with the proximal fenestrations being directed to the orifices of the BT and LCCA automatically when the LSA fenestration is catheterized and secured by covered stent placement. The deployment algorithm actively steers the operator away from superfluous manipulations of the device within the arch and avoids guidewire manipulation in carotid arteries. The long-term durability will need to be assessed in studies with long-term follow-up.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...