Lung-volume reduction surgery for severe emphysema: Appraisal of its current status

Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 128-132

  Trow, Terence K ^a,b  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WINTHROP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR); Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); Emphysema; Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS)

Indexed keywords

CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL; EXERCISE TOLERANCE; FORCED EXPIRATORY VOLUME; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; LUNG EMPHYSEMA; LUNG RESECTION; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; REVIEW; SURGICAL MORTALITY; TREATMENT INDICATION;

EID: 1642447015     PISSN: 10705287     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00063198-200403000-00007     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Meyers BF, Patterson GA: Chronic obstructive pulmonary Disease: bullectomy, lung volume reduction surgery, and transplant for patients with chronic obstructive lung disease. Thorax 2003, 58:634-638. A concise review of available surgical procedures for COPD with emphasis on selection criteria for lung-volume reduction surgery.
2. Brantigan OC, Mueller E, Kress MB: A surgical approach to pulmonary emphysema. Am Rev Respir Dis 1959, 80:194-206.
3. Cooper JD, Trulock EP, Triantafillou AN, et al.: Bilateral pneumectomy (volume reduction) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995, 109:106-119.
4. Cooper JD, Patterson GA, Sundarsen RS, et al.: Results of 150 consecutive bilateral lung volume reduction procedures in patients with severe emphysema. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996, 112:1319-1330.
5. Pompeo E, Marino M, Nofroni I, et al.: Reduction pneumoplasty versus respiratory rehabilitation in severe emphysema: a randomized study. Ann Thorac Surg 2000, 70:948-954.
6. Criner GJ, Cordova FC, Furukawa S, et al.: Prospective randomized trial comparing bilateral lung volume reduction surgery to pulmonary rehabilitation in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999, 160:2018-2027.
7. Geddes D, Davies M, Koyama H, et al.: Effect of lung volume reduction surgery in patients with severe emphysema. N Engl J Med 2000, 343:239-245.
8. Russi EW, Stammberger U, Weder W: Lung volume reduction surgery for emphysema. Eur Respir J 1997, 10:208-218.
9. Goldstein RS, Todd TRJ, Guyatt G, et al.: Influence of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) on health related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive lung disease. Thorax 2003, 58:405-410. The first randomized controlled trial to apply a pulmonary-specific measure of quality of life as opposed to more general health outcomes. This study showed 12 months of sustainable pulmonary quality-of-life benefits in the surgically, but not the medically treated groups.
10. National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group: A randomized trial comparing lung-volume-reduction surgery with medical therapy for severe emphysema. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:2059-2073. The most comprehensive and largest randomized trial to date comparing surgical to medical arms in the management of severe emphysema. It defines important (but controversial) subgroups that benefit most and least from surgical intervention.
11. Ciccone AM, Meyers BF, Guthrie GE, et al.: Long-term outcome of bilateral lung volume reduction in 250 consecutive patients with emphysema. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003, 125:513-525. The largest single institution prospective cohort study of patient outcomes over a median of 4.4 years. This report's strength lies in its rigorous efforts to maintain patient follow-up to minimize drop-out bias.
12. Department of Health and Human Services: Lung volume reduction surgery and Medicare coverage policy: implications for recently published evidence. Health Care Financing Administration Report to Congress. Washington (DC); Department of Health and Human Services: 1998.
13. Flaherty KR, Kazerooni EA, Curgis JL, et al.: Short-term and long-term outcomes after lung volume reduction surgery. Chest 2001, 119:1337-1346.
14. Kotloff RM, Tino G, Palevsky HI, et al.: Comparison of short-term functional outcomes following unilateral and bilateral lung volume reduction surgery. Chest 1998, 113:890-895.
15. Sciurba FC, Rogers RM, Keenan RJ, et al.: Improvement in pulmonary function and elastic recoil after lung-reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema. N Engl J Med 1996, 334:1095-1099.
16. Fessler HE, Scharf SM, Permutt S: Improvement in spirometry following lung volume reduction surgery. Application of a physiologic model. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002, 165:34-40.
17. Ingenito EP, Loring SH, Moy ML, et al.: Physiologic characterization of variability in response to lung volume reduction surgery. J Appl Physiol 2003, 94:20-30. A rigorous analysis of preoperative and postoperative pulmonary function in 77 patients undergoing LVRS testing the hypothetical mathematical model of Fessier et al. to determine what factors were most important in "resizing" the lung to the chest wall. RV reduction appeared to be the most important finding in responders to LVRS.
18. Takayama T, Shindoh C, Kurokawa Y, et al.: Effects of lung volume reduction surgery on oxygen cost of breathing. Chest 2003, 123:1847-1852.
19. McKenna RJ, Brenner M, Fischel RJ, et al.: Should lung volume reduction for emphysema be unilateral or bilateral? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996, 112:1331-1339.
20. Brenner M, McKenna RJ, Chen JC, et al.: Survival following bilateral staple lung volume reduction surgery for emphysema. Chest 1999, 115:390-396.
21. Wood DE: Lung volume reduction surgery: tempest in a teapot. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003, 125:457-459. A balanced and insightful commentary on the limits of the current data on LVRS provided by prospective cohort analyses.
22. Trow TK: Less is more-sometimes. Clin Pulm Med 2003, 10:299-301. A critical commentary on the limits to conclusions that can be drawn from the NETT trial.
23. Bloch KE, Georgescu CL, Russi EW, et al.: Gain and subsequent loss of lung function after lung volume reduction surgery in cases of severe emphysema with different morphologic patterns. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 123:845-854.
24. Yusen RD, Lefrak SS, Gierada DS, et al.: A prospective evaluation of lung volume reduction surgery in 200 consecutive patients. Chest 2003, 123:1026-1037. A large single-institution report of patients observed over 4 years after LVRS, with dyspnea scores, functional outcomes, pulmonary function, and survival data provided.
25. Appleton S, Adams R, Porter S, et al.: Sustained improvements in dyspnea and pulmonary function 3 to 5 years after lung volume reduction surgery. Chest 2003, 123:1838-1846.
26. Berger RL, Celli BR, Meneghetti AL, et al.: Limitations of randomized clinical trials for evaluating emerging operations: the case of lung volume reduction surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2001, 72:649-657.
27. National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group: Patients at high risk of death after lung-volume-reduction surgery. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:1075-1083. Important subgroup analysis from the NETT trial revealing who should not be offered LVRS due to excess mortality.
28. Ware JH: The national emphysema treatment trial - how strong is the evidence? N Engl J Med 2003, 348:2055-2056. A thoughtful critique of the NETT trial with emphasis on the pitfalls of secondary analyses from a statistician's viewpoint, despite biological plausibility.
29. Drazen JM, Epstein AM: Guidance concerning surgery for emphysema. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:2134-2136. A more generalized commentary on the NETT trial reminding us that good research separates what we actually know from what we think should work, and cautioning us as to the extent to which the NETT trial actually achieves this in LVRS.
30. Calverly PMA: Closing the NETT on lung volume reduction surgery. Thorax 2003, 58:651-653.
31. Pakhale SS, Guiterrez C: Lung-volume-reduction surgery. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:999-1000.
32. Sciurba FC: Preoperative predictors of outcome following lung volume reduction surgery. Thorax 2002, 57 (suppl):ii 47-52. An excellent appraisal of the data from the NETT trial by one of its authors emphasizing who not to operate on.
33. National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group: Cost-effectiveness of lung-volume-reduction surgery for patients with severe emphysema. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:2092-2102. A prospective economic analysis of patients entering and completing the NETT using the Quality of Well Being Scale to arrive at quality-adjusted life-years over 3 years' time.
34. Meyers BF: Complications of lung volume reduction surgery. Sem Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 14:399-402.
35. Yates DR, Martin-Ucar AE, Vaughan R: Another case of metalloptysis after lung volume reduction surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2003, 75:633-640.
36. Provencher S: Deslauriers: Late complication of bovine pericardium patches used for lung volume reduction surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003, 23:1059-1061.
37. Bankier AA, DeMaertalaer V, Keyzer C, et al.: Pulmonary emphysema: subjective visual grading versus objective quantification with macroscopic morphometry and thin-section CT densitometry. Radiology 1999, 211:851-858.
38. Gierada DS: Radiologic assessment of emphysema for lung volume reduction surgery. Sem Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 14:381-390.
39. Nakano Y, Coxson HO, Bosan S, et al.: Core to rind distribution of severe emphysema predicts outcome of lung volume reduction surgery. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001, 164:2195-2199.
40. Rogers RM, Coxson HO, Sciurba FC, et al.: Preoperative severity of emphysema predictive of improvement after lung volume reduction surgery. Use of CT morphometry. Chest 2000, 118:1240-1247.
41. Gierada DS, Yusen RD, Villanueva IA, et al.: Patient selection for lung volume reduction surgery. An objective model based on prior clinical decision and quantitative CT analysis. Chest 2000, 117:991-998.
42. Mishima M, Hirai T, Itoh H, et al.: Complexity of terminal airspace geometry assessed by lung computed tomography in normal subjects and patients with chronic obstructive lung disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1999, 96:8829-8834.
43. Coxson HO, Whittal KP, Nakano Y, et al.: Selection of patients for lung volume reduction surgery using a power law analysis of computed tomographic scan. Thorax 2003, 58:510-514. The first study to date to apply power law mathematical analysis of preoperative CT scans of patients undergoing LVRS to predict postoperative exercise performance. The authors maintain that the technique allows quantitative determination of extent and location of emphysema that will predict success of LVRS.
44. Sabanathan S, Richardson J, Pieri-Davies S: Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction. J Cardiovasc Surg 2003, 44:101-108.
45. Snell GI, Holsworth L, Borrill ZL, et al.: The potential for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction using bronchial prostheses. Chest 2003, 124:1073-1080. The first report of successful placement of a valved bronchial prothesis in humans.
46. Ingenito EP, Reilly JJ, Mentzer SJ, et al.: Bronchoscopic volume reduction. A safe and effective alternative to surgical therapy for emphysema. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001, 164:295-301.
47. Ingenito EP, Berger RL, Henderson C, et al.: Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction using tissue engineering principles. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003, 167:771-778. A fascinating description of a novel approach to reduce lung volume in targeted lung segments in sheep by induction of fibrosis. This may have implication for human use in the near future.