两阶段与单阶段计算机断层扫描引导的肺结节定位和切除术的疗效、安全性和患者满意度对比。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Journal of thoracic disease Pub Date : 2024-07-30 Epub Date: 2024-07-11 DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-303
Hei Yu Matthew Chen, Tsz Ho Andrew Wong, Ki Kwong Li, Ho Yan Howard Chan
{"title":"两阶段与单阶段计算机断层扫描引导的肺结节定位和切除术的疗效、安全性和患者满意度对比。","authors":"Hei Yu Matthew Chen, Tsz Ho Andrew Wong, Ki Kwong Li, Ho Yan Howard Chan","doi":"10.21037/jtd-24-303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low-dose computed tomography (CT) has been increasingly utilized for lung cancer screening. Localization of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) is crucial for resection. Two-stage localization method involves dye injection by radiologists prior to the operation. The significant interval between localization and resection is associated with a higher risk of marker failure, psychological distress and procedural complications. Single-stage localization and resection procedure under general anesthesia poses unique challenges. The aim of the study is to compare the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study comparing outcomes between two-stage and single-stage pre-operative localization of SPN. The primary study outcome was total operating time. Secondary outcomes included successful lesion localization, complication rate, 30-day readmission, mortality, patient satisfaction, and pain level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 26 and 56 patients were included for the single and two-stage group respectively. Total operative time was significantly longer in the single-stage arm (mean: 188 min) than that of the two-stage arm (mean: 172 min, P<0.001) due to the additional time needed for intra-operative localization. Mean satisfaction score was significantly higher in the single-stage group than that of the two-stage group (92 <i>vs.</i> 52.69, P=0.004). Pain level assessed by numerical rating scales was better in the single-stage arm compared to the two-stage arm (mean: 8.8 <i>vs.</i> 4.85, P=0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Single-stage localization and resection resulted in a minor increase in total operative time, higher patient satisfaction and less pain with comparable safety and efficacy to conventional two-stage approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":17542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of thoracic disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11320263/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction of two-stage versus single-stage computed tomography guided localization and resection of pulmonary nodules.\",\"authors\":\"Hei Yu Matthew Chen, Tsz Ho Andrew Wong, Ki Kwong Li, Ho Yan Howard Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/jtd-24-303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low-dose computed tomography (CT) has been increasingly utilized for lung cancer screening. Localization of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) is crucial for resection. Two-stage localization method involves dye injection by radiologists prior to the operation. The significant interval between localization and resection is associated with a higher risk of marker failure, psychological distress and procedural complications. Single-stage localization and resection procedure under general anesthesia poses unique challenges. The aim of the study is to compare the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study comparing outcomes between two-stage and single-stage pre-operative localization of SPN. The primary study outcome was total operating time. Secondary outcomes included successful lesion localization, complication rate, 30-day readmission, mortality, patient satisfaction, and pain level.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 26 and 56 patients were included for the single and two-stage group respectively. Total operative time was significantly longer in the single-stage arm (mean: 188 min) than that of the two-stage arm (mean: 172 min, P<0.001) due to the additional time needed for intra-operative localization. Mean satisfaction score was significantly higher in the single-stage group than that of the two-stage group (92 <i>vs.</i> 52.69, P=0.004). Pain level assessed by numerical rating scales was better in the single-stage arm compared to the two-stage arm (mean: 8.8 <i>vs.</i> 4.85, P=0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Single-stage localization and resection resulted in a minor increase in total operative time, higher patient satisfaction and less pain with comparable safety and efficacy to conventional two-stage approach.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11320263/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of thoracic disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-303\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of thoracic disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:低剂量计算机断层扫描(CT)越来越多地被用于肺癌筛查。单发肺结节(SPN)的定位对切除手术至关重要。两阶段定位法包括放射科医生在手术前注射染料。定位与切除之间的间隔时间较长,导致标记失败、心理困扰和手术并发症的风险较高。在全身麻醉下进行单阶段定位和切除手术具有独特的挑战性。本研究旨在比较两种方法的安全性、有效性和患者满意度:这是一项回顾性研究,比较了两阶段和单阶段 SPN 术前定位的结果。主要研究结果是总手术时间。次要结果包括病灶定位成功率、并发症发生率、30 天再入院率、死亡率、患者满意度和疼痛程度:单阶段组和双阶段组分别共有 26 名和 56 名患者。单级手术组的总手术时间(平均:188 分钟)明显长于两级手术组(平均:172 分钟,Pvs.52.69,P=0.004)。通过数字评分量表评估的疼痛程度,单阶段手术组优于双阶段手术组(平均:8.8 vs. 4.85,P=0.007):单阶段定位和切除术略微延长了总手术时间,提高了患者满意度,减轻了疼痛,其安全性和有效性与传统的两阶段方法相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction of two-stage versus single-stage computed tomography guided localization and resection of pulmonary nodules.

Background: Low-dose computed tomography (CT) has been increasingly utilized for lung cancer screening. Localization of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) is crucial for resection. Two-stage localization method involves dye injection by radiologists prior to the operation. The significant interval between localization and resection is associated with a higher risk of marker failure, psychological distress and procedural complications. Single-stage localization and resection procedure under general anesthesia poses unique challenges. The aim of the study is to compare the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction between the two methods.

Methods: This is a retrospective study comparing outcomes between two-stage and single-stage pre-operative localization of SPN. The primary study outcome was total operating time. Secondary outcomes included successful lesion localization, complication rate, 30-day readmission, mortality, patient satisfaction, and pain level.

Results: A total of 26 and 56 patients were included for the single and two-stage group respectively. Total operative time was significantly longer in the single-stage arm (mean: 188 min) than that of the two-stage arm (mean: 172 min, P<0.001) due to the additional time needed for intra-operative localization. Mean satisfaction score was significantly higher in the single-stage group than that of the two-stage group (92 vs. 52.69, P=0.004). Pain level assessed by numerical rating scales was better in the single-stage arm compared to the two-stage arm (mean: 8.8 vs. 4.85, P=0.007).

Conclusions: Single-stage localization and resection resulted in a minor increase in total operative time, higher patient satisfaction and less pain with comparable safety and efficacy to conventional two-stage approach.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of thoracic disease
Journal of thoracic disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
254
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD, J Thorac Dis, pISSN: 2072-1439; eISSN: 2077-6624) was founded in Dec 2009, and indexed in PubMed in Dec 2011 and Science Citation Index SCI in Feb 2013. It is published quarterly (Dec 2009- Dec 2011), bimonthly (Jan 2012 - Dec 2013), monthly (Jan. 2014-) and openly distributed worldwide. JTD received its impact factor of 2.365 for the year 2016. JTD publishes manuscripts that describe new findings and provide current, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease. All the submission and reviewing are conducted electronically so that rapid review is assured.
期刊最新文献
A prediction model based on computed tomography characteristics for identifying malignant from benign sub-centimeter solid pulmonary nodules. Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis a narrative review primary focus on treatments. Bronchoscopic holmium laser ablation continuous cryoablation for the treatment of airway stenosis caused by tissue hyperplasia after tracheal intubation: clinical case observation. Can the rest of the world replicate excellent segmentectomy outcomes with lower volume thoracic surgeons? Chest wall resections for non-small cell lung cancer: a literature review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1