Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?

Tülüce, Kerim; TURUT, Hasan

doi:10.26663/cts.2022.010

Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?

Kerim TÜLÜCE, (Department Thoracic Surgery, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Training and Research, Rize, Turkey)

Hasan TURUT (Department Thoracic Surgery, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Training and Research, Rize, Turkey)

Current Thoracic Surgery

1 0

Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 59 - 65 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.26663/cts.2022.010 İndeks Tarihi: 29-09-2022

Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?

Öz:

Background: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has become the standard treatment method for pleural empyema’s surgical treatment. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, and cosmetic results are satisfactory, especially with the uniportal approach. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated and compared outcomes of patients treated with uniportal and biportal VATS. Materials and Methods: A total of 73 patients who underwent VATS for empyema in our clinic between January 2017 and October 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients who underwent uniportal and biportal VATS were compared in terms of age, sex, side and stage of empyema, length of hospital stay, comorbidities, smoking history, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score, number of chest tubes placed postoperatively, postoperative Heimlich valve placement, postoperative complications, postoperative drainage volume, recurrence, preoperative and 72-h postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) values, and postoperative 24-h and 72-h VAS (visual analog scale) pain scores. Univariate comparisons were done with R-based Jamovi statistical software. Results: Fifty-two (71.2%) of the patients were male, and the mean age was 57 (IQR 41-67). Empyema was stage 2 in 38 (52.1%) patients and stage 3 in 35 (47.9%) patients. VATS was uniportal in 52 patients (71.2%) and biportal in 21 patients (28.8%). The uniportal VATS group had significantly lower drainage volume (p = 0.006) and VAS scores (p < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in the other parameters. Conclusions: Our data indicate that uniportal VATS was superior to biportal VATS for the treatment of empyema in terms of postoperative pain and drainage.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Godfrey MS, Bramley KT, Detterbeck F. Medical and Surgical Management of Empyema. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2019; 40: 361-74.
2. Ferguson AD, Prescott RJ, Selkon JB, Watson D, Swinburn CR. The clinical course and management of thoracic empyema. QJM 1996; 89: 285-9.
3. Hamm H, Light RW. Parapneumonic effusion and empyema. Eur Respir J 1997; 10: 1150-6.
4. Falguera M, Carratalà J, Bielsa S, Garcia-Vidal C, RuizGonzales A, Chica I et al. Predictive factors, microbiology and outcome of patients with parapneumonic effusion. Eur Respir J 2011; 38: 1173-9.
5. Chalmers JD, Singanayagam A, Murray MP, Scally C, Fawzi A, Hill AT. Risk factors for complicated parapneumonic effusion and empyema on presentation to hospital with communityacquired pneumonia. Thorax 2009; 64: 592-7.
6. Higuchi M, Suzuki. Current status and prospect of medical and surgical management for thoracic empyema. Curr Challenges Thorac Surg 2020; 2: 39.
7. Davies HE, Davies RJO, Davies CWH. Management of pleural infection in adults: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010. Thorax 2010; 65: ii41–ii53.
8. Pan H, He J, Shen J, Jiang L, Liang W, He J. A meta-analysis of video-assisted thoracoscopic decortication versus open thoracotomy decortication for patients with empyema. J Thorac Dis 2017; 9: 2006-14.
9. Molnar TF. Current surgical treatment of thoracic empyema in adults. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2007; 32: 422-30.
10. Luh SP, Chou MC, Wang LS, Chen JY, Tsai TP. Videoassisted thoracoscopic surgery in the treatment of complicated parapneumonic effusions or empyemas: outcome of 234 patients. Chest 2005; 127: 1427-32.
11. Striffeler H, Gugger M, Im Hof V, Cerny A, Furrer M, Ris HB. Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Fibrinopurulent Pleural Empyema in 67 Patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 65: 319-23.
12. Finley C, Clifton J, FitzGerald JM, Yee J. Empyema: An Increasing Concern in Canada. Can Respir J 2008; 15:85–89.
13. Akçay O, Acar T, Cantay S, Anar S. Minimally invasive approach to pneumothorax: Single port or two ports? Turkish J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 28: 347-51.
14. Kutluk AC, Kocaturk CI, Akin H, Erdogan S, Bilen S, Karapinar K et al. Which is the Best Minimal Invasive Approach for the Treatment of Spontaneous Pneumothorax? Uniport, Two, or Three Ports: A Prospective Randomized Trail. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 66: 589-94.
15. Cansever L, Sezen CB, Yaran OV, Bedirhan MA. Comparison of short-term quality of life in patients undergoing videoassisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy. Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Derg 2020; 28: 623-8.
16. Liu C, Liu L. Uniportal VATS: a sublimation of micro-invasive lung cancer resection. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi 2014; 17: 527-30.
17. DE LA Torre M, González-Rivas D, Fernández R, Delgado M, Fieira E, Méndez L. Uniportal VATS lobectomy. Minerva Chir 2016; 71: 46–60.
18. Shen KR, Bribriesco A, Crabtree T, Denlinger C, Eby J, Eiken P et al. The American Association for Thoracic Surgery consensus guidelines for the management of empyema. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017; 153: e129-e146.
19. Waller DA, Rengarajan A. Thoracoscopic decortication: a role for video-assisted surgery in chronic postpneumonic pleural empyema. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71: 1813-6.
20. Chan DT, Sihoe AD, Chan S, Tsang DS, Fang B, Lee TW et al. Surgical treatment for empyema thoracis: is video-assisted thoracic surgery “better” than thoracotomy? Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 84: 225-31.
21. Cardillo G, Carleo F, Carbone L, Di Martino M, Salvadori L, Petrella L et al. Chronic postpneumonic pleural empyema: comparative merits of thoracoscopic versus open decortication. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009; 36: 914-8.
22. Chambers A, Routledge T, Dunning J, Scarci M. Is videoassisted thoracoscopic surgical decortication superior to open surgery in the management of adults with primary empyema? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2010; 11: 171-7.
23. Samancilar O, Akçam Tİ, Kaya SO, Ozturk O, Akcay O, Ceylan KC. The Efficacy of VATS and Intrapleural Fibrinolytic Therapy in Parapneumonic Empyema Treatment. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 24: 19-24.
24. Shahin Y, Duffy J, Beggs D, Black E, Majewski A. Surgical management of primary empyema of the pleural cavity: outcome of 81 patients. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2010; 10: 565-7.
25. Bongiolatti S, Voltolini L, Borgianni S, Borrelli R, Tancredi G, Viggiano D et al. Uniportal thoracoscopic decortication for pleural empyema and the role of ultrasonographic preoperative staging. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2017; 24: 560-6.
26. Ismail M, Nachira D, Meacci E, Ferretti GM, Swierzy M, Englisch JP et al. Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of pleural empyema. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10: S3696-S3703.

APA	Tülüce K, TURUT H (2022). Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. , 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
Chicago	Tülüce Kerim,TURUT Hasan Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. (2022): 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
MLA	Tülüce Kerim,TURUT Hasan Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. , 2022, ss.59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
AMA	Tülüce K,TURUT H Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. . 2022; 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
Vancouver	Tülüce K,TURUT H Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. . 2022; 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
IEEE	Tülüce K,TURUT H "Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?." , ss.59 - 65, 2022. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
ISNAD	Tülüce, Kerim - TURUT, Hasan. "Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?". (2022), 59-65. https://doi.org/10.26663/cts.2022.010

APA	Tülüce K, TURUT H (2022). Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. Current Thoracic Surgery, 7(2), 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
Chicago	Tülüce Kerim,TURUT Hasan Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. Current Thoracic Surgery 7, no.2 (2022): 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
MLA	Tülüce Kerim,TURUT Hasan Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. Current Thoracic Surgery, vol.7, no.2, 2022, ss.59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
AMA	Tülüce K,TURUT H Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. Current Thoracic Surgery. 2022; 7(2): 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
Vancouver	Tülüce K,TURUT H Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?. Current Thoracic Surgery. 2022; 7(2): 59 - 65. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
IEEE	Tülüce K,TURUT H "Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?." Current Thoracic Surgery, 7, ss.59 - 65, 2022. 10.26663/cts.2022.010
ISNAD	Tülüce, Kerim - TURUT, Hasan. "Minimally invasive approach to pleural empyema: uniportal or biportal?". Current Thoracic Surgery 7/2 (2022), 59-65. https://doi.org/10.26663/cts.2022.010