Background: Robotic surgery is increasingly used to resect lung cancer. However costs are high. We compared costs and outcomes for robotic surgery, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), and open surgery, to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: We retrospectively assessed 103 consecutive patients given lobectomy or segmentectomy for clinical stage I or II NSCLC. Three surgeons could choose VATS or open, the fourth could choose between all three techniques. Between-group differences were assessed by Fisher’s exact, two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. P values <0.05 were considered significant. Results: Twenty-three patients were treated by robot, 41 by VATS, and 39 by open surgery. Age, physical status, pulmonary function, comorbidities, stage, and perioperative complications did not differ between the groups. Pathological tumor size was greater in the open than VATS and robotic groups (P=0.025). Duration of surgery was 150, 191 and 116 minutes, by robotic, VATS and open approaches, respectively (P<0.001). Significantly more lymph node stations were removed (P<0.001), and median length of stay was shorter (4, 5 and 6 days, respectively; P<0.001) in the robotic than VATS and open groups. Estimated costs were 82%, 68% and 69%, respectively, of the regional health service reimbursement for robotic, VATS and open approaches. Discussion: Robotic surgery for early lung cancer was associated with shorter stay and more extensive lymph node dissection than VATS and open surgery. Duration of surgery was shorter for robotic than VATS. Although the cost of robotic thoracic surgery is high, the hospital makes a profit.

Background: Ultrasound can influence the diagnosis and impact the treatment plan in critical patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether, without encountering major environment- or patient-related limitations, ultrasound examination under a critical care ultrasonography protocol can be performed to detect occult anomalies, to prompt urgent changes in therapy or induce further testing or interventions, and to confirm or modify diagnosis. Methods: One hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients admitted to a general intensive care unit were assessed under a critical care ultrasonography protocol, and the data were analyzed prospectively. Systematic ultrasound examination of the optic nerve, thorax, heart, abdomen, and venous system was performed at the bedside. Results: Environmental conditions hampered the examination slightly in 101/125 patients (80.8%), moderately in 20/125 patients (16%), and strongly in 4/125 patients (3.2%). Ultrasonographic findings modified the admitting diagnosis in 32/125 patients (25.6%), confirmed it in 73/125 patients (58.4%), were not effective in confirming or modifying it in 17/125 patients (13.6%), and missed it in 3/125 patients (2.4%). Ultrasonographic findings prompted further testing in 23/125 patients (18.4%), led to changes in medical therapy in 22/125 patients (17.6%), and to invasive procedures in 27/125 patients (21.6%). Conclusions: In this series of patients consecutively admitted to an intensive care unit, ultrasound examination revealed a high prevalence of unsuspected clinical abnormalities, with the highest number of new ultrasound abnormalities detected in patients with septic shock. As part of rapid global assessment of the patient on admission, our ultrasound protocol holds potential for improving healthcare quality.

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to report the results of the first consensus paper among international experts in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UniVATS) lobectomy obtained through a Delphi process, the objective of which was to define and standardize the main procedural steps, optimize its indications and perioperative management and identify elements to assist in future training. METHODS: The 40 members of the working group were convened and organized on a voluntary basis by the Uniportal VATS Interest Group (UVIG) of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS). An e-consensus finding exercise using the Delphi method was applied to require 75% agreement for reaching consensus on each question. Repeated iterations of anonymous voting continued for 3 rounds. RESULTS: Overall, 31 international experts from 18 countries completed all 3 rounds of questionnaires. Although a technical quorum was not achieved, most of the responders agreed that the maximum size of a UniVATS incision should be ≤4 cm. Agreement was reached on many points outlining the currently accepted definition of a UniVATS lobectomy, its indications and contraindications, perioperative clinical management and recommendations for training and future research directions. CONCLUSIONS: The UVIG Consensus Report stated that UniVATS offers a valid alternative to standard VATS techniques. Only longer follow-up and randomized controlled studies will predict whether UniVATS represents a valid alternative approach to multiport VATS for major lung resections or whether it should be performed only in selected cases and by selected centres. The next step for the ESTS UVIG is the establishment of a UniVATS section inside the ESTS databases.

Background: The optimal management for spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) remains contentious, with various proposed approaches. This joint clinical practice guideline from the ERS, EACTS and ESTS societies provides evidence-based recommendations for the management of SP. Methods: This multidisciplinary Task Force addressed 12 key clinical questions on the management of pneumothorax, using ERS methodology for guideline development. Systematic searches were performed in MEDLINE and Embase. Evidence was synthesised by conducting meta-analyses, if possible, or narratively. Certainty of evidence was rated with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations). The Evidence to Decision framework was used to decide on the direction and strength of the recommendations. Results: The panel makes a conditional recommendation for conservative care of minimally symptomatic patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP) who are clinically stable. We make a strong recommendation for needle aspiration over chest tube drain for initial PSP treatment. We make a conditional recommendation for ambulatory management for initial PSP treatment. We make a conditional recommendation for early surgical intervention for the initial treatment of PSP in patients who prioritise recurrence prevention. The panel makes a conditional recommendation for autologous blood patch in secondary SP patients with persistent air leak (PAL). The panel could not make recommendations for other interventions, including bronchial valves, suction, pleurodesis in addition to surgical resection or type of surgical pleurodesis. Conclusions: With this international guideline, the ERS, EACTS and ESTS societies provide clinical practice recommendations for SP management. We highlight evidence gaps for the management of PAL and recurrence prevention, with research recommendations made.

Background: In recent years, many factors have revamped the interest in segmentectomies as preferred procedure for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes of segmentectomy versus lobectomy regarding overall survival (OS) in the surgical treatment of stage I NSCLC, as stated in the conclusions of the largest studies conducted in this field and reported to date. Methods: The searching strategy was developed in EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1990 until December 2016. The meta-analysis was performed with the combination of the reported survival outcomes of the individual studies using a random effect model. The OS of the lobectomy group was compared with the segmentectomy group alone. The hazard ratio (HR) and standard error were extracted or calculated for each study using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Regarding the results, most of these studies were based on the retrospective data. The size of the cohorts varied from 17 to 11,520, with a total number of 24,542 patients. The pooled HR was 1.04 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92–1.18; P=0.50]. Conclusions: The survival in the segmentectomy group was not inferior to patients treated with lobectomy. In conclusion, the current meta-analysis disclosed that segmentectomies produce similar survival compared to lobectomy for patients with stage I NSCLC. To establish the role of segmentectomy in early NSCLC, more evidence is needed, in particular, a large numbered, prospective, randomised trials, which should dissolve the uncertainties and the questions raised by retrospective data.

Interventional trials that evaluate treatment effects using surrogate endpoints have become increasingly common. This paper describes four linked empirical studies and the development of a framework for defining, interpreting and reporting surrogate endpoints in trials. As part of developing the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) extensions for randomised trials reporting surrogate endpoints, we undertook a scoping review, e-Delphi study, consensus meeting, and a web survey to examine current definitions and stakeholder (including clinicians, trial investigators, patients and public partners, journal editors, and health technology experts) interpretations of surrogate endpoints as primary outcome measures in trials. Current surrogate endpoint definitional frameworks are inconsistent and unclear. Surrogate endpoints are used in trials as a substitute of the treatment effects of an intervention on the target outcome(s) of ultimate interest, events measuring how patients feel, function, or survive. Traditionally the consideration of surrogate endpoints in trials has focused on biomarkers (e.g., HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, tumour response), especially in the medical product regulatory setting. Nevertheless, the concept of surrogacy in trials is potentially broader. Intermediate outcomes that include a measure of function or symptoms (e.g., angina frequency, exercise tolerance) can also be used as substitute for target outcomes (e.g., all-cause mortality)—thereby acting as surrogate endpoints. However, we found a lack of consensus among stakeholders on accepting and interpreting intermediate outcomes in trials as surrogate endpoints or target outcomes. In our assessment, patients and health technology assessment experts appeared more likely to consider intermediate outcomes to be surrogate endpoints than clinicians and regulators. There is an urgent need for better understanding and reporting on the use of surrogate endpoints, especially in the setting of interventional trials. We provide a framework for the definition of surrogate endpoints (biomarkers and intermediate outcomes) and target outcomes in trials to improve future reporting and aid stakeholders' interpretation and use of trial surrogate endpoint evidence. SPIRIT-SURROGATE/CONSORT-SURROGATE project is Medical Research Council Better Research Better Health (MR/V038400/1) funded.