Reed, Michael F.

Abstract Rationale Follow-up of patients with emphysema treated with endobronchial valves is limited to 3–12 months after treatment in prior reports. To date, no comparative data exist between treatment and control subjects with a longer follow-up. Objectives To assess the durability of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) in patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema over a 24-month period. Methods EMPROVE, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, presents a rigorous comparison between treatment and control groups for up to 24 months. Lung function, respiratory symptoms, and quality-of-life (QOL) measures were assessed. Results A significant improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second was maintained at 24 months in the SVS treatment group versus the control group. Similarly, significant improvements were maintained in several QOL measures, including the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire and the COPD Assessment Test. Patients in the SVS treatment group experienced significantly less dyspnea than those in the control group, as indicated by the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score. Adverse events at 24 months did not significantly differ between the SVS treatment and control groups. Acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation rates in the SVS treatment and control groups were 13.7% (14 of 102) and 15.6% (7 of 45), respectively. Pneumothorax rates in the SVS treatment and control groups were 1.0% (1 of 102) and 0.0% (0 of 45), respectively. Conclusions SVS treatment resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful durable improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, and QOL, as well as a statistically significant reduction in dyspnea, for at least 24 months while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze overall survival (OS) of robotic-assisted lobectomy (RL), video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATS), and open lobectomy (OL) performed by experienced thoracic surgeons across multiple institutions. Summary Background Data: Surgeons have increasingly adopted RL for resection of early-stage lung cancer. Comparative survival data following these approaches is largely from single-institution case series or administrative data sets. Methods: Retrospective data was collected from 21 institutions from 2013 to 2019. Consecutive cases performed for clinical stage IA–IIIA lung cancer were included. Induction therapy patients were excluded. The propensity-score method of inverse-probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate association among OS and relevant risk factors. Results: A total of 2789 RL, 2661 VATS, and 1196 OL cases were included. The unadjusted 5-year OS rate was highest for OL (84%) followed by RL (81%) and VATS (74%); P=0.008. Similar trends were also observed after inverse-probability of treatment weighting adjustment (RL 81%; VATS 73%, OL 85%, P=0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analyses revealed that OL and RL were associated with significantly higher OS compared with VATS (OL vs. VATS: hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.001 and RL vs. VATS: hazard ratio=0.79; P=0.007). Conclusions: Our finding from this large multicenter study suggests that patients undergoing RL and OL have statistically similar OS, while the VATS group was associated with shorter OS. Further studies with longer follow-up are necessary to help evaluate these observations.

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of open lobectomy (OL), VATS, and robotic-assisted lobectomy (RL). Summary Background Data: Robotic-assisted lobectomy has seen increasing adoption for treatment of early-stage lung cancer. Comparative data regarding these approaches is largely from single-institution case series or administrative datasets. Methods: Retrospective data was collected from 21 institutions from 2013 to 2019. All consecutive cases performed for clinical stage IA-IIIA lung cancer were included. Neoadjuvant cases were excluded. Propensity-score matching (1:1) was based on age, sex, race, smoking-status, FEV1%, Zubrod score, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor size, and clinical T and N stage. Results: A total of 2391 RL, 2174 VATS, and 1156 OL cases were included. After propensity-score matching there were 885 pairs of RL vs OL, 1,711 pairs of RL vs VATS, and 952 pairs of VATS vs OL. Operative time for RL was shorter than VATS (P < 0.0001) and OL (P = 0.0004). Compared to OL, RL and VATS had less overall postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay (LOS), and lower transfusion rates (all P<0.02). Compared to VATS, RL had lower conversion rate (P<0.0001), shorter hospital stay (P<0.0001) and a lower postoperative transfusion rate (P =0.01). RL and VATS cohorts had comparable postoperative complication rates. In-hospital mortality was comparable between all groups. Conclusions: RL and VATS approaches were associated with favorable perioperative outcomes compared to OL. Robotic-assisted lobectomy was also associated with a reduced length of stay and decreased conversion rate when compared to VATS.

Abstract Rationale Less invasive, nonsurgical approaches are needed to treat severe emphysema. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Spiration Valve System (SVS) versus optimal medical management. Methods In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial, subjects aged 40 years or older with severe, heterogeneous emphysema were randomized 2:1 to SVS with medical management (treatment) or medical management alone (control). Measurements and Main Results The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in mean FEV1 from baseline to 6 months. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included: difference in FEV1 responder rates, target lobe volume reduction, hyperinflation, health status, dyspnea, and exercise capacity. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of composite thoracic serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted by determining the 95% Bayesian credible intervals (BCIs) for the difference between treatment and control arms. Between October 2013 and May 2017, 172 participants (53.5% male; mean age, 67.4 yr) were randomized to treatment (n = 113) or control (n = 59). Mean FEV1 showed statistically significant improvements between the treatment and control groups—between-group difference at 6 and 12 months, respectively, of 0.101 L (95% BCI, 0.060–0.141) and 0.099 L (95% BCI, 0.048–0.151). At 6 months, the treatment group had statistically significant improvements in all secondary endpoints except 6-minute-walk distance. Composite thoracic serious adverse event incidence through 6 months was greater in the treatment group (31.0% vs. 11.9%), primarily due to a 12.4% incidence of serious pneumothorax. Conclusions In patients with severe heterogeneous emphysema, the SVS shows significant improvement in multiple efficacy outcomes, with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01812447).