• Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg · Apr 2015

    Review

    In minor and major thoracic procedures is uniport superior to multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery?

    • Farhana Akter, Tom Routledge, Levon Toufektzian, and Rizwan Attia.
    • Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
    • Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015 Apr 1; 20 (4): 550-5.

    AbstractA best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: Are there differences in outcomes in uniport compared with multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery? Altogether, 45 papers were found using the reported search, of which 8 papers represent the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type and level of evidence of publication, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Two studies (272 patients) compared outcomes for lobectomy. One study found pain control was significantly better in uniportal (P < 0.01) with earlier mobilization (P < 0.05), and decreased hospital stay by half a day (P < 0.05). The chest drain volume was less, and consequently the number of days the chest drain remained in situ decreased by 1 day (P < 0.05). The second study looking at lobectomies failed to find any differences between the two techniques. For minor thoracic procedures (pneumothorax, peripheral lung nodules, thymic tumours, lung biopsies, sympathectomies and mediastinal cystectomies), 3 papers (117 patients) showed a statistically significant reduction in pain score during inpatient stay, and 1 paper showed a reduction in pain score day 0 postoperatively, however, no difference in pain score days 1 and 3 postoperatively. Two papers (n = 91) showed no difference in the reported pain scores; however, the patients in the uniportal group experienced less paraesthesia postoperatively. Patients in the uniportal group in this study also had reduced in-hospital stay (P = 0.03), and this led to a reduction in inpatient costs (P = 0.03). Four other studies, however, did not find any significant difference in duration of hospital stay. Pain scores are lower in uniportal VATS, most studies however do not demonstrate differences in other outcomes including analgesic use, duration of chest tube drainage, length of hospital stay or other thoracic complications. We conclude that, although uniport access may offer improved pain scores, the current evidence reveals no differences in most postoperative outcomes between uniport and multiport approaches to VATS in either minor or major thoracic procedures. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.