Video assisted thoracoscopic surgery shows promise in lung cancer resection; says study
Written By : Dr Satabdi Saha
Medically Reviewed By : Dr. Kamal Kant Kohli
Published On 2021-06-23 04:15 GMT | Update On 2021-06-23 07:53 GMT
Advertisement
VATS lobectomy for lung cancer is associated with less pain, fewer in-hospital complications and shorter hospital stay, highlights recent study findings. Superior functional recovery continues in the post-operative period with improved physical function, lower re-admission rates and no difference in disease-free and overall survival up to one-year as also noted with VATS lobectomy. The findings have been put forth in 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.
Video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is a popular access for lung cancer resection. However, there is limited information from RCTs from in-hospital to one-year clinica Video assisted thoracoscopic surgery l efficacy, safety and oncologic outcomes of a minimal access approach.VIOLET is a parallel group multi-center RCT conducted in 9 centers in the United Kingdom that recruited participants with known or suspected (cT1-3, N0-1 and M0) lung cancer (ISRCTN13472721).
Results from the trial highlighted some key facts.
• From July 2015 to February 2019, 503 participants were randomized to VATS (n=247) or open (n=256) lobectomy.
• Patients allocated to VATS had less pain with a mean difference (MD) in visual analogue score of -0.54 (95%CI -0.99 to -0.10) despite less analgesic consumption (mean ratio 0.90, 95%CI 0.80 to 1.01).
• After discharge pain was consistent on multiple sub-scales including overall pain (MD -7.19, -10.59 to -3.80), chest pain (MD -4.66, -7.96 to -1.36) and an 18% relative risk (RR) reduction in incision pain (RR 0.82; 0.72 to 0.94) up to one-year.
• Better functional recovery continued in VATS arm after discharge with better physical function (primary outcome) with MD of 4.65 (1.69 to 7.61; P=0.002) at 5 weeks and overall improvement in global health status with a MD of 4.21 (1.62 to 6.79; P=0.001).
• In hospital, VATS arm had fewer complications (RR 0.74, 0.66 to 0.84; P<0.001) with no difference in serious adverse events (RR 0.98, 0.59 to 1.63; P=0.948).
• Median hospital stay was one day shorter in the VATS arm (4 vs 5 days) corresponding to hazard ratio (HR) for discharge of 1.34, 95%CI 1.09 to 1.65; P=0.006). After discharge VATS arm had 19% less serious adverse events (RR 0.81, 0.66 to 1.00; p=0.053) and lower readmission rates (29.0% vs. 35.9% respectively) to one-year.
• Of those with lymph node disease, 50.9% in the VATS and 45.9% in open arms received adjuvant treatment. There was no difference in the time to uptake of adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 1.12, 0.62 to 2.02; p=0.716).
• Recurrence with clinical follow up and CT at one-year was similar with 7.7% versus 8.1% in the VATS and open groups respectively.
• Progression-free survival (HR 0.74, 0.43 to 1.27; p=0.27) and overall survival HR 0.67, 0.32 to 1.40; p=0.282) was not significantly different.
For full article follow the link: Lim EKS, Batchelor TJP, Dunning J, et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy in patients with early-stage lung cancer: One-year results from a randomized controlled trial (VIOLET). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:
Source: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.
Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.