Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Versus Usual Care After Lung Cancer Surgery: Long-Term Results of a Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.We previously reported superior symptom control of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO)-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery for up to 1 month postdischarge. Here, we present the long-term results (1-12 months) of this multicenter, randomized trial, where patients were assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative ePRO-based symptom management or usual care daily postsurgery, twice weekly postdischarge until 1 month, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postdischarge. Long-term patient-reported outcomes were assessed with MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer module. Per-protocol analyses were performed with 55 patients in the ePRO group and 57 in the usual care group. At 12 months postdischarge, the ePRO group reported significantly fewer symptom threshold events (any of the five target symptom scored ≥4; median [IQR], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .040) than the usual care group. From 1 to 12 months postdischarge, the ePRO group consistently reported significantly lower composite scores for physical interference (estimate, -0.86 [95% CI, -1.32 to -0.39]) and affective interference (estimate, -0.70 [95% CI, -1.14 to -0.26]). Early intensive ePRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery reduced symptom burden and improved functional status for up to 1 year postdischarge, supporting its integration into standard care.

Longitudinal patient-reported outcomes 1 year after thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer: a multicentre, prospective cohort study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Segmentectomy and lobectomy are the main surgical procedures for early-stage lung cancer. However, few studies have analysed patient-reported outcomes after segmentectomy versus lobectomy. This study aims to compare patient-reported outcomes-such as symptoms, daily functioning and quality of life-between thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer during the 1 year after surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Overall, 788 newly diagnosed patients with early-stage lung cancer (tumour size ≤2 cm), who are scheduled to undergo thoracoscopic segmentectomy or lobectomy, will be recruited in this multicentre, prospective cohort study. The patients will receive standardised care after surgery. The Perioperative Symptom Assessment for Lung Surgery-a validated lung cancer surgery-specific scale-will be used to assess the symptoms and functions at baseline, at discharge and monthly after discharge for 1 year. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Lung Cancer module 29 will be used to assess the patients' quality of life at the same time points. The primary outcome will be the shortness of breath scores during the first year after thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy and will be compared using mixed-effects models. The secondary outcomes will include other symptoms, indicators of daily functioning, quality of life scores and traditional clinical outcomes. These will be compared using mixed-effects models and the Student's t-test, non-parametric test or Χ2 test. Propensity score matching will be used to ensure an even distribution of known confounders between the groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee for Medical Research and New Medical Technology of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study (approval number: SCCHEC-02-2022-002). All participants will be instructed to provide informed consent. The manuscript is based on protocol version 3.0. The study results will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2200060753.

Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Versus Usual Care After Lung Cancer Surgery: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based symptom management in the early period after lung cancer surgery. METHODS: Before surgery, patients with clinically diagnosed lung cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive postoperative PRO-based symptom management or usual care. All patients reported symptoms on MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer presurgery, daily postsurgery, and twice a week after discharge for up to 4 weeks via an electronic PRO system. In the intervention group, treating surgeons responded to overthreshold electronic alerts driven by any of the five target symptom scores (score ≥ 4 on a 0-10 scale for pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, shortness of breath, and coughing). The control group patients received usual care and no alerts were generated. The primary outcome was the number of symptom threshold events (any target symptom with a score of ≥ 4) at discharge. Per-protocol analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of the 166 participants, 83 were randomly allocated to each group. At discharge, the intervention group reported fewer symptom threshold events than the control group (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-2] v 2 [0-3]; P = .007). At 4 weeks postdischarge, this difference was maintained between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-0] v 0 [0-1]; P = .018). The intervention group had a lower complication rate than the control group (21.5% v 40.6%; P = .019). Surgeons spent a median of 3 minutes managing an alert. CONCLUSION: PRO-based symptom management after lung cancer surgery showed lower symptom burden and fewer complications than usual care for up to 4 weeks postdischarge.

Merged image reconstruction for anomalous systemic arterial supply to a normal lung.

We present a rare case of anomalous systemic arterial supply to normal basal segments of the left lower lobe. Plain computed tomography (CT) showed an occupancy lesion in the left lower lobe. Contrast CT and merged three-dimensional (3D) image reconstruction showed that the anomalous systemic artery originated from the descending aorta and substituted the basilar segmental pulmonary artery and the arterial supply to the basilar segment of left lower lobe. We use the merged image reconstruction of 3D CT angiography and bronchography (3D-CTAB) to depict the precise location and stereoscopic shape of this vascular malformation. Therefore, we think that these data add a novel comprehensive perspective on the diagnosis of the feature of malformation and treatment planning for this rare disease.

[Omentum Transplantation in Thorax to Cover Bronchial Stump as Treatment of 
Bronchopleural Fistula After Pulmonary Resection: Report of 6 Cases' Experience].

BACKGROUND: Bronchial pleural fistula (BPF) is a common complication after thoracic surgery for lung resection. Clinical treatment is complex and the effect is poor. The treatment of BPF after lung resection has plagued thoracic surgeons. We reviewed retrospectively the clinical and follow-up data of 6 patients in our hospital who underwent the omentum transplantation in thorax to cover bronchial stump as treatment of BPF after pulmonary resection to analyze why BPF occurs and describe this treatment method. We intend to discuss and evaluate the feasibility, safety and small sample success rate ofthis treatment method. METHODS: During August 2016 to February 2018, six patients in our hospital underwent remedial open thoracotomy and omentum transplantation in pleura space to cover bronchial stump as treatment of bronchopleural fistula after pulmonary resection. Four patients had undergone a prior pneumonectomy and two patients had undergone a prior lobectomy (the residual lungs were resected with the main bronchus cut by endoscopic stapler during the reoperation). The bronchial stumps were sutured by 4-0 string with needle and covered by omentums, which were transplanted in pleura space from the cardiophrenic angle. Postoperatively, the pleura space was irrigated and drained. Summarize the clinical effect and technique learning points. RESULTS: The patients were all males, aged 61 to 73 years (median age: 66). BPF occurred from postoperative day 10 to 45 (median postoperative day 25). The reoperation was finished in 80 mins-150 mins (median 110 mins). Total blood loss was 200 mL-1,000 mL (median 450 mL). These patients were discharged on postoperative day 12-17 (median 14 days), and there was no more complications associated with bronchopleural fistula. All six patients' bronchial stumps were well closed (100%) and have recovered well during the follow-up period, which lasted 1 month-18 months. CONCLUSIONS: Remedial operation should be performed as soon as possible when BPF after pulmonary resection diagnosed. Excellent prognoses can be achieved by omentum which is easy to get transplanted in thorax to cover bronchial stump as treatment in patients with BPF after pulmonary resection those who can tolerate reoperation.