Ravanbakhsh, Samine

Summary Caustic esophageal injury can cause severe morbidity and mortality. Despite the need for emergent treatment, individual experience in diagnosis and management can be limited. Computed tomography (CT) has emerged as a promising non-invasive modality for assessing injury severity, but the clinical utility of both CT and endoscopy should be investigated. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of the PubMed database identified relevant articles published from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies investigating the use of CT and/or endoscopy in diagnosing and managing caustic esophageal injury. Twelve articles were selected from a pool of 931 studies. Findings suggested that CT was superior in diagnostic capability to endoscopy in high-grade injury and stricture formation, but less so for low grade injuries. Diagnostic algorithms incorporating imaging with laboratory studies have emerged in the literature, which are promising pending additional validation. CT can serve as a valuable, non-invasive tool in the initial evaluation of caustic esophageal injury and is postulated to accurately predict both the need for emergent surgery and the risk of stricture formation. However, CT should not replace but rather complement the use of endoscopy to comprehensively evaluate these potentially highly morbid situations.

AbstractBackgroundThere is a knowledge gap regarding lobar versus sublobar resection for atypical carcinoid (AC) of the lung. As such, the authors sought to understand and analyze the outcomes of sublobar resection versus lobectomy in this patient population.MethodsA retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database was performed to compare overall survival (OS) between patients treated with lobectomy and patients treated with sublobar resection for AC of the lung between the years 2004 and 2016. Patient characteristics were compared with χ2 tests. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate OS distributions, and the log‐rank test was used to compare distributions by treatment strategy. A multivariable Cox regression model was used to assess associations between the treatment strategy and OS. A propensity score matching method was also implemented to further eliminate treatment selection bias in the study sample.ResultsThe database identified 669 patients with T1–T4 and N0–N3 lung ACs that were surgically resected. Unadjusted Kaplan–Meier survival curves did not demonstrate an OS difference between lobectomy and sublobar resection (p = .094). After propensity score matching, curves demonstrated a numerical improvement in OS with lobectomy; however, it was not statistically significant (p = .5). In a subgroup analysis, lobectomy and node‐negative disease were associated with the best OS, whereas sublobar resection and node‐positive disease were associated with the worst OS (p < .0001). Nodal involvement was associated with worse survival, regardless of surgical treatment (p < .0001).ConclusionsIn patients with T1–T4 and N0–N3 ACs of the lung, lobectomy was not associated with an improvement in OS in comparison with sublobar resection.

Abstract Background Lung cancer screening programs have increased the detection of early-stage lung cancer. High-resolution computed tomography can detect small, low-density pulmonary nodules, or ground-glass opacities. Obtaining a tissue diagnosis can be challenging, often necessitating surgical diagnosis. Preoperative localization and intraoperative fluoroscopy are valuable tools to guide resections for small pulmonary nodules. Case Description We present three cases using intraoperative fluoroscopy and Faxitron Bioptics that enhanced our certainty of resection of nonpalpable nodules. Conclusion We support the use of intraoperative fluoroscopy with the unique addition of Faxitron BioVision as safe and reliable methods to enhance the certainty of resection.