• I F Oey, D A Waller, S Bal, S J Singh, T J Spyt, and M D L Morgan.
• Department of Respiratory Medicine and Thoracic Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK.
• Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2002 Oct 1; 22 (4): 610-4.

ObjectiveBilateral lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is thought to be preferable to unilateral surgery due to greater initial benefit but the subsequent rate of decline may also be greater. We compared the long term physiological and health status outcome of LVRS performed on one or simultaneously on both lungs.MethodsProspective data were collected on a consecutive series of 65 patients undergoing LVRS who were all suitable for bilateral surgery. Twenty-six patients: age 59 (8) years underwent bilateral LVRS by video-assisted thoracoscopy (VAT) or sternotomy and 39 patients: age 60 (6) years underwent unilateral VAT. The perioperative effects of LVRS on spirometry were prospectively recorded at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months.ResultsThe unilateral group had similar preoperative lung volumes to the bilateral patients: forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV(1)) 26 vs. 30% predicted, RV 275 vs. 246% predicted and total lung capacity (TLC) 148 vs. 142% predicted. Unilateral LVRS was associated with significantly lower weight of lung resected: 80 (31) vs. 118 (46) g; hospital stay: 16 (10) days vs. 28 (22) days. Thirty-day mortality was 3% in the unilateral and 8% in the bilateral group (P=0.34). Postoperative ventilation occurred in 5% in the unilateral and in 42% in the bilateral group (P=0.0002). The decline of FEV(1) during the first postoperative year was significant in the bilateral group (-313 ml/y, P=0.04) but not significant in the unilateral group (-50 ml/y, P=0.18). SF 36 scores in all eight domains were similar in both groups preoperatively and at any postoperative interval.ConclusionWe have found no benefit from bilateral simultaneous LVRS and prefer unilateral LVRS because of the lower morbidity, resulting in earlier discharge, and slower decline in physiological benefit.

19 keywords...

hide…