Abstract

We sought to evaluate the effect of tumor size, location, and clinical nodal status on outcomes after thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer.All patients who underwent attempted thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer between June 1999 and October 2010 at a single institution were reviewed. A model for morbidity including published risk factors as well as tumor size, location, and clinical N status was developed by multivariable logistic regression.During the study period, 916 thoracoscopic lobectomies met study criteria: 329 for peripheral, clinical N0 tumors = 3 cm and 504 for tumors that were central, clinical node positive, or >3 cm. Tumor location could not be documented for 83 patients. Conversions to thoracotomy occurred in 36 patients (4%); patients with clinically node-positive disease had higher conversion rates (11 conversions in 153 clinical N1 to N3 patients [7.2%] vs 25 in 763 clinical N0 patients [3.3%, P = .03]. Overall operative mortality was 1.6% (14 patients) and morbidity was 32% (296 patients). Although patients with larger tumors (P = .006) and central tumors (P = .01) had increased complications by univariate analysis, tumor size >3 cm (P = .17) and central location (P = .5) did not predict significantly overall morbidity in multivariate analysis. Clinical node status did not predict increased complications by univariate or multivariate analysis. Significant predictors of morbidity in multivariable analysis were increasing age, decreasing forced expiratory volume in 1 second, prior chemotherapy, and congestive heart failure.Thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancers that are central, clinically node positive, or >3 cm does not confer increased morbidity compared with peripheral, clinical N0 cancers that are <3 cm.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.10.039

View details for Web of Science ID 000313634700035

View details for PubMedID 23177123