Uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for spontaneous pneumothorax.

BACKGROUND: Multiportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (mVATS) is the standard approach for the surgical treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. However, uniportal VATS (uVATS) has emerged as an alternative aiming to minimize surgical morbidity. This study aims to strengthen the evidence on the safety and efficiency of uVATS compared to mVATS. METHODS: From January 2004 to December 2020, records of patients who had undergone surgical treatment for primary or secondary spontaneous pneumothorax were evaluated for eligibility. Patients who had undergone pleurectomy combined with bullectomy or apical wedge resection via uVATS or mVATS were included. Surgical characteristics and postoperative data were compared between patients who had undergone surgery via uVATS or mVATS. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine whether the surgical approach was associated with any complication (primary outcome), major complications (i.e., Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3), recurrence, prolonged hospitalization or prolonged chest drainage duration (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: A total of 212 patients were enrolled. Patients treated via uVATS (n = 71) and mVATS (n = 141) were significantly different in pneumothorax type (secondary spontaneous; uVATS: 54 [76%], mVATS: 79 [56%]; p = 0.004). No significant differences were observed in (major) complications and recurrence rates between both groups. Multivariable analyses revealed that the surgical approach was no significant predictor for the primary or secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that uVATS is non-inferior to mVATS in the surgical treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax regarding safety and efficiency, and thus the uVATS approach has the potential for further improvements in the perioperative surgical care for spontaneous pneumothorax.

Predicting Survival in Patients Presenting With Spinal Epidural Metastases: The Limburg Spinal Metastasis Score.

BACKGROUND: Patients with spinal epidural metastases (SEM) often experience a reduction in ambulatory status and, thus, the quality of life. Predicting which patients will benefit from a surgical intervention remains a challenge. Life expectancy is an essential factor to be considered in surgical decision-making, although not the only one. Prediction models can add value in surgical decision-making. The goal of this study was to develop and internally validate a novel model (Limburg spinal metastases score [LSMS]) and compare the predictive value with 2 commonly used models: modified Bauer score and Oswestry Spinal Risk Index (OSRI). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 144 consecutive patients who underwent surgical decompression for SEM in our centers between November 2006 and December 2020. Clinical and surgical parameters were evaluated. The novel prediction model was based on multivariate analysis and was internally validated. External validation of the 2 most commonly used prediction models was performed. RESULTS: The median survival was 17 months, 55.7% of the immobile patients regained ambulation postoperatively. In 50 patients (34.7%), at least 1 complication occurred within 30 days after surgery. The LSMS consists of 4 parameters: primary tumor type, Karnofsky performance score, presence of visceral metastases, and presence of multiple spinal metastases. Bootstrap internal validation of the model developed on this cohort yielded an optimism-corrected c-statistic of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.80). The c-statistic of the OSRI score and the Bauer score was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.64-0.74) and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.62-0.72), respectively. CONCLUSION: The LSMS consists of 4 parameters to assist surgical decision-making for patients with SEM. The score is easy to use and appears more accurate in our population in comparison with previous existing models. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A novel prediction model was developed to aid in surgical decision-making for patients with spinal epidural metastases.