Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effect of 4 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) versus chest physical therapy (CPT) on the preoperative functional
capacity and postoperative respiratory morbidity of patients undergoing lung cancer resection.
Design: Randomized single-blinded study.
Setting: A teaching hospital.
Participants: Patients undergoing lung cancer resection (N=24).
Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive PR (strength and endurance training) versus CPT (breathing exercises for lung
expansion). Both groups received educational classes.
Main Outcome Measures: Functional parameters assessed before and after 4 weeks of PR or CPT (phase 1), and pulmonary complications
assessed after lung cancer resection (phase 2).
Results: Twelve patients were randomly assigned to the PR arm and 12 to the CPT arm. Three patients in the CPT arm were not submitted to lung
resection because of inoperable cancer. During phase 1 evaluation, most functional parameters in the PR group improved from baseline to 1
month: forced vital capacity (FVC) (1.47L [1.27-2.33L] vs 1.71L [1.65-2.80L], respectively; P=.02); percentage of predicted FVC (FVC%;
62.5% [49%-71%] vs 76% [65%-79.7%], respectively; P<.05); 6-minute walk test (425.5
85.3m vs 475
86.5m, respectively; P<.05); maximal inspiratory pressure (90
45.9cmH2O vs 117.5
36.5cmH2O, respectively; P<.05); and maximal expiratory pressure (79.7
17.1cmH2O vs 92.9
21.4cmH2O, respectively; P<.05). During phase 2 evaluation, the PR group had a lower incidence of postoperative respiratory morbidity (P=.01), a shorter length of postoperative stay (12.2
3.6d vs 7.8
4.8d, respectively; P=.04), and required a chest tube for fewer days (7.4
2.6d vs 4.5
2.9d, respectively; P=.03) compared with the CPT arm. Conclusions: These findings suggest that 4 weeks of PR before lung cancer resection improves preoperative functional capacity and decreases the postoperative respiratory morbidity. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2013;94:53-8

ABSTRACT
A joint initiative by the British Thoracic Society and the
Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and
Ireland was undertaken to update the 2001 guidelines for
the selection and assessment of patients with lung cancer
who can potentially be managed by radical treatment.

SYNOPSIS OF RECOMMENDATIONS

SECTION 1: SELECTION OF PATIENTS FOR
RADICAL TREATMENT
1.1 Diagnosis and staging
1.1.1 Imaging
1. View all available historical images at the onset
of the diagnostic pathway and review them prior to
treatment. [C]
2. Ensure contemporaneous imaging is available at
the time of radical treatment. [C]
3. Ensure a CTscan that is <4 weeks old is available at the time of radical treatment of borderline lesions. [D] 4. Arrange a CT scan of the chest, lower neck and upper abdomen with intravenous contrast medium administration early in the diagnostic pathway for all patients with suspected lung cancer potentially suitable for radical treatment. [C] 5. Avoid relying on a CT scan of the chest as the sole investigation to stage the mediastinal lymph nodes. [B] 6. Ensure positron emission tomography (PET)-CT scanning is available for all patients being considered for radical treatment. [B] 7. Offer radical treatment without further mediastinal lymph node sampling if there is no significant uptake in normal sized mediastinal lymph nodes on PET-CT scanning. [C] 8. Evaluate PET positive mediastinal nodes by further mediastinal sampling. [C] 9. Confirm the presence of isolated distant metastases/synchronous tumours by biopsy or further imaging in patients being considered for radical treatment. [C] 10. Consider MRI or CT scanning of the head in patients selected for radical treatment, especially in stage III disease. [C] 11. Evaluate patients with features suggestive of intracranial pathology by an initial CT scan of the head followed by MRI if normal or MRI as an initial test. [C] 12. Biopsy adrenal lesions that show abnormal uptake on PET-CT scanning before radical treatment. [D] 13. RR The role of PET-CT scanning in patients with small cell lung cancer considered suitable for radical treatment should be evaluated in clinical trials. 1.1.2 Endoscopic procedures for diagnosis and staging 14. When obtaining diagnostic and staging samples, consider the adequacy of these in the context of selection of patients for targeted therapy. [D] 15. Ensure biopsy samples are taken in adequate numbers and size where there is negligible additional risk to the patient. [D] 16. Use transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) and endobronchial ultrasound/endoscopic ultrasound (EBUS/EUS)-guided TBNA as an initial diagnostic and staging procedure according to findings on CT or PET-CT scans. [C] 17. Consider EBUS/EUS-guided TBNA to stage the mediastinum. [C] 18. Confirm negative results obtained by TBNA and EBUS/EUS-guided TBNA by mediastinoscopy and lymph node biopsy where clinically appropriate. [C] 19. RR The use of narrow band and autofluorescence imaging should be investigated in clinical trials. 1.1.3 7th Edition of TNM for lung tumours 20. The 7th edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer should be used for staging patients with lung cancer. [B] 21. The IASLC international nodal map should be used in the assessment and staging of lymph node disease. [C] 1.2 Management of specific disease subsets 1.2.1 T3 disease 22. Offer patients with T3N0e1M0 disease radical treatment. [D] 1.2.2 T4 disease 23. Consider selected patients with T4N0e1M0 disease for radical multimodality treatment. [D] 24. RR Consider clinical trials of radical treatment for T4 disease. 1.2.3 N2 disease 25. Consider radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with T1e4N2 (bulky or fixed) M0 disease. [B] 26. Consider surgery as part of multimodality management in patients with T1e3N2 (non-fixed, non-bulky, single zone) M0 disease. [B] 27. RR Consider further randomised trials of surgery added to multimodality management in patients with multi-zone N2 disease to establish if any subgroups of patients might benefit more from the addition of surgery. 1.2.4 N3 disease 28. RR Consider clinical trials of radical treatment for patients with T1e4N3M0 disease. 1.2.5 M1 disease 29. RR Consider clinical trials of radical treatment for patients with M1a and M1b disease. 1.2.6 Bronchioloalveolar carcinoma 30. Offer suitable patients with single-site bronchioloalveolar carcinoma anatomical lung resection. [C] 31. Consider multiple wedge resections in suitable patients with a limited number of sites of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma. [C] 1.2.7 Open and close thoracotomy 32. Surgical units should have an open and close thoracotomy rate of around 5%. [D] SECTION 2: SURGERY 2.1 Assessment of the risks of surgery 2.1.1 Risk assessment for operative mortality 33. Consider using a global risk score such as Thoracoscore to estimate the risk of death when evaluating and consenting patients with lung cancer for surgery. [C] 2.1.2. Risk assessment for cardiovascular morbidity 34. Use the American College of Cardiology guidelines 2007 as a basis for assessing perioperative cardiovascular risk. [C] 35. Avoid lung resection within 30 days of myocardial infarction. [B] 36. Seek a cardiology review in patients with an active cardiac condition or $3 risk factors or poor cardiac functional capacity. [C] 37. Offer surgery without further investigations to patients with #2 risk factors and good cardiac functional capacity. [B] 38. Begin optimisation of medical therapy and secondary prophylaxis for coronary disease as early in the patient pathway as possible. [C] 39. Continue anti-ischaemic treatment in the perioperative period including aspirin, statins and b blockade. [B] 40. Discuss management of patients with a coronary stent with a cardiologist to determine perioperative antiplatelet management. [C] 41. Consider patients with chronic stable angina and conventional ACC/AHA indications for treatment (coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention) for revascularisation prior to thoracic surgery. [C] 2.1.3 Assessment of lung function 42. Measure lung carbon monoxide transfer factor in all patients regardless of spirometric values. [C] 43. Offer surgical resection to patients with low risk of postoperative dyspnoea. [C] 44. Offer surgical resection to patients at moderate to high risk of postoperative dyspnoea if they are aware of and accept the risks of dyspnoea and associated complications. [D] 45. Consider using ventilation scintigraphy or perfusion scintigraphy to predict postoperative lung function if a ventilation or perfusion mismatch is suspected. [C] 46.Consider using quantitative CTorMRI to predict postoperative lung function if the facility is available. [C] 47. Consider using shuttle walk testing as functional assessment in patients with moderate to high risk of postoperative dyspnoea using a distance walked of >400 m as a cut-off for
good function. [C]
48. Consider cardiopulmonary exercise testing to measure peak
oxygen consumption as functional assessment in patients with
moderate to high risk of postoperative dyspnoea using >15 ml/
kg/min as a cut-off for good function. [D]
49. RR Further studies with specific outcomes are required to
define the role of exercise testing in the selection of patients for
surgery.

2.1.4 Postoperative quality of life/dyspnoea
50. Avoid pneumonectomy where possible by performing
bronchoangioplastic resection or non-anatomical resection. [C]
51. Avoid taking pulmonary function and exercise tests as sole
surrogates for quality of life evaluation. [C]
52.Whenestimating quality of life, use a validated instrument.[D]

2.2 Surgical approach
2.2.1 Pulmonary resection
53. Employ segment counting to estimate postoperative lung
function as part of risk assessment for postoperative dyspnoea.
[D]
54. Consider patients with moderate to high risk of postoperative
dyspnoea for lung parenchymal sparing surgery. [D]
55. Consider bronchoangioplastic procedures in suitable patients
to preserve pulmonary function. [D]
56. Consider patients with limited pulmonary reserve for
sublobar resection as an acceptable alternative to lobectomy. [B]
57. RR Consider randomised trials of segmental resection versus
wedge resection.
58. Consider patients with concomitant lung cancer within
severe heterogeneous emphysema for lung resection based on
lung volume reduction surgery criteria. [B]
2.2.2 Lymph node management
59. Perform systematic nodal dissection in all patients undergoing
resection for lung cancer. [A]
60. Remove or sample a minimum of six lymph nodes or
stations. [D]

2.3 Chemotherapy
2.3.1 Preoperative chemotherapy
61. Patients with resectable lung cancer should not routinely be
offered preoperative chemotherapy. [B]
2.3.2 Postoperative chemotherapy
62. Offer postoperative chemotherapy to patients with TNM 7th
edition T1e3N1e2M0 non-small cell lung cancer. [A]
iii2 Thorax 2010;65(Suppl III):iii1eiii27. doi:10.1136/thx.2010.145938
Supplement
Downloaded from thorax.bmj.com on October 4, 2011 – Published by group.bmj.com
63. Consider postoperative chemotherapy in patients with TNM
7th edition T2e3N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer with tumours
>4 cm diameter. [B]
64. Use a cisplatin-based combination therapy regimen in
postoperative chemotherapy. [A]
65. RR Consider further trials of novel chemotherapeutic agents
in conjunction with surgical resection.

2.4 Postoperative radiotherapy
66. Postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) is not indicated after R0
complete resection. [A]
67. Consider PORT for patients with residual microscopic
disease at the resection margin where the benefit of reduction
in local recurrence outweighs the risk of mortality and
morbidity related to PORT. [C]
68. Use CT-planned three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy
for patients receiving PORT. [B]
69. Consider PORTafter completion of adjuvant chemotherapy.
[B]
70. RR Randomised trials looking at the effect of PORT in pN2
non-small cell lung cancer are recommended.

SECTION 3: RADICAL RADIOTHERAPY
3.1 Assessment of the risks of radiotherapy
3.1.1 Risks of radical radiotherapy
71. Perform three-dimensional treatment planning in patients
undergoing radical thoracic radiotherapy. [B]
72. A clinical oncologist specialising in lung oncology should
determine suitability for radical radiotherapy, taking into
account performance status and comorbidities. [D]
73. RR Clinical trials of radical radiotherapy should include
measures of lung function, outcome and toxicity.

3.2 Radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy regimens
3.2.1 Early stage disease
74. Offer radical radiotherapy to patients with early stage
non-small cell lung cancer who have an unacceptable risk of
surgical complications. [B]
75. Consider CHART as a treatment option in patients with
early stage non-small cell lung cancer and unacceptable risk of
surgical complications. [A]
76. Consider stereotactic body irradiation in patients with early
stage non-small cell lung cancer and unacceptable risk of surgical
complications. [C]
3.2.2 Locally advanced disease
77. Offer chemoradiotherapy to patients with locally advanced
non-small cell lung cancer and good performance status who are
unsuitable for surgery. [A]
78. Offer selected patients with good performance status
concurrent chemoradiotherapy with a cisplatin-based chemotherapy
combination. [A]
79. Offer patients unsuitable for concurrent chemoradiotherapy
sequential chemoradiotherapy. [A]
80. Consider CHART as a treatment option for patients with
locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. [A]

3.3 Other radical treatment
81. RR Randomised controlled trials are recommended
comparing conventional radical treatment (surgery, radical
radiotherapy) with other radical treatments where there is
evidence of efficacy in case series.
82. Consider alternative radical treatment in early stage lung
cancer in patients at high risk of morbidity and mortality with
conventional radical treatment. [D]
83. Consider radical brachytherapy in patients with early
invasive mucosal or submucosal non-small cell lung cancer. [D]

SECTION 4: SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER
4.1 Chemoradiotherapy
84. Offer selected patients with T1e4N0e3M0 limited stage
small cell lung cancer both chemotherapy and radiotherapy. [A]
85. Offer patients with T1e4N0e3M0 limited stage small cell
lung cancer and good performance status concurrent chemoradiotherapy.
[A]
86. Recommended treatment options for concurrent chemoradiotherapy
are twice daily thoracic radiotherapy (45 Gy in
3 weeks) with cisplatin and etoposide and 40 Gy once daily
delivered in 3 weeks. [A]
87. Offer patients unsuitable for concurrent chemoradiotherapy
sequential chemoradiotherapy. [A]
88. Offer prophylactic cranial irradiation to patients with
response to treatment and stable disease. [A]

4.2 Surgery
89. Consider patients with T1e3N0e1M0 small cell lung cancer
for surgery as part of multi-modality management. [D]
90. Surgical management of patients with T1e3N2M0 small cell
lung cancer should only be considered in the context of a clinical
trial. [C]

SECTION 5: PROVISION OF TREATMENT OPTIONS91. All available treatment options, including those that are the
subject of research, should be discussed with patients and their
carers and the risks and benefits presented so that they may
make an informed choice. [D]

BACKGROUND: There is controversy surrounding the value of the predicted postoperative diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide (DLCOppo) in comparison to the forced expired volume in 1 s for prediction of pulmonary complications (PCs) after thoracic surgery.

METHODS: Using a prospective database, we performed an analysis of 956 patients who had resection for lung cancer at a single institution. PC was defined as the occurrence of any of the following: atelectasis, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, respiratory failure, and need for supplemental oxygen at hospital discharge.

RESULTS: PCs occurred in 121 of 956 patients (12.7%). Preoperative chemotherapy (odds ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.06–2.55, P = 0.02, point score 2) and a lower DLCOppo (odds ratio per each 5% decrement 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.06–1.19, P < 0.0001, point score 1 per each 5% decrement of DLCOppo less than 100%) were independent risk factors for PCs. We defined 3 overall risk categories for PCs: low <=10 points, 39 of 448 patients (9%); intermediate 11–13 points, 37 of 256 patients (14%); and high >=14 points, 42 of 159 patients (26%). The median (range) length of hospital stay was significantly greater for patients who developed PCs than for those who did not: 12 (3–113) days vs 6 (2–39) days, P < 0.0001, respectively. Similarly, 30-day mortality was significantly more frequent for patients who developed PCs than for those who did not: 16 of 121 (13.2%) vs 6 of 835 (0.7%), P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that PCs after thoracic surgery for lung cancer can be predicted with moderate accuracy based on DLCOppo and whether patients had chemotherapy. Forced expired volume in 1 s was not a predictor of PCs.

Objective: FEV1 measured on the first postoperative day has shown to be a better predictor of complications than traditional ppoFEV1. Therefore, its estimation before operation may enhance risk stratification. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a model to predict FEV1 on the first postoperative day after major lung resection. Methods: FEV1 was prospectively measured on the first postoperative day in 272 patients submitted for lobectomy or pneumonectomy at two centers. A random sample of 136 patients was used to develop a model estimating the first day FEV1 by using multiple regression analysis including several preoperative and operative factors. The model was then validated by bootstrap analysis and tested on the other sample of 136 patients. Results: Factors reliably associated with postoperative first day FEV1 were age (p=0.002), preoperative FEV1 (p<0.0001), the presence of epidural analgesia (p<0.0001), and the percentage of non-obstructed segments removed during operation (p=0.001). The following model estimating the first day postoperative FEV1 was derived: -2.648+0.295xage+0.371xFEV1+8.216xepidural analgesia-0.338xpercentage of non-obstructed segments removed during operation. In the validation set, the mean predicted first day postoperative FEV1 value did not differ from the observed one (42.6 vs 42.0, respectively; p=0.3) and the plot of the observed versus the predicted first day FEV1 showed a satisfactory calibration. Conclusions: We developed a model predicting the first day postoperative FEV1. If future analyses will prove its role in stratifying the early postoperative risk, it may be integrated in preoperative evaluation algorithms to refine risk stratification.

Background: Diffusing capacity (Dlco), an independent predictor of morbidity after major lung resection, is not used routinely in preoperative evaluation because of a perceived lack of value in patients with normal spirometry. We evaluated the potential utility of measuring Dlco for assessment of operative risk in lung resection patients with normal spirometry. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted for patients undergoing lung resection from 1980 through 2006 to identify predictors of postoperative morbidity. Patients were divided into groups with or without chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), defined as a ratio of forced expiratory volume in the first second to forced vital capacity of less than 0.7 or a ratio of 0.7 or greater, respectively. Analyses for each group identified covariates for three outcomes: operative mortality, pulmonary morbidity, and overall morbidity. Results: Of 1,046 patients in the database, 1,008 (545 men; mean age, 61.8 +/- 0.35 years) had data permitting determination of COPD status: 450 (45%) with COPD, 558 (55%) without COPD. Operations included lobectomy (752; 75%), bilobectomy (83; 8%), and pneumonectomy (173; 17%). Overall mortality, pulmonary morbidity, and overall morbidity incidences were 59 (5.8%), 140 (14.0%), and 311 (31.4%), respectively. Pulmonary morbidity and operative mortality were related to postoperative predicted Dlco, age, and performance status in patients with and without COPD. The postoperative predicted Dlco was the single strongest predictor of pulmonary morbidity and operative mortality in both patient groups. Overall complications were related to postoperative predicted Dlco only in the COPD group. Conclusions: Diffusing capacity is an important predictor of postoperative morbidity after lung resection even in patients with normal spirometry. Routine measurement of Dlco, regardless of spirometric findings, can help predict risk in candidates for major lung resection.

Spaggiari, Lorenzoa; Scanagatta, Paoloa. Curr Opinion Oncol. Volume 19(2), March 2007, p 84–91
Purpose of review: The aim of this review is to analyze recent evidence for optimal treatment of elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer, focusing on surgery, and possibly to foresee the future strategies to apply in these patients.

Recent findings: Surgery in elderly patients affected by non-small cell lung cancer is safe and feasible when careful preoperative respiratory and cardiac studies have been carried out and the disease has been properly staged. The surgical treatment is not to be denied in elderly patients due to age per se, but when a major contraindication to surgery has been recognized. Long term survival for elderly patients with early stage lung cancer treated by anatomical pulmonary resection is comparable to the survival rate of younger patients. Pneumonectomy, extended surgical procedure or preoperative induction chemotherapy are major risk factors for an increased postoperative morbidity and mortality rate. When co-morbidities are present or a patient is 80 years or older, there is evidence that a non-anatomical resection can be performed without affecting long-term results.

Summary: Due to the aging of the general population, elderly patients will become a large percentage of the cases of non-small cell lung cancer to be treated. Implementing preoperative cardiologic studies and redefining selective respiratory criteria specifically could dramatically improve results.

Authors
Dyszkiewicz W. Pawlak K. Gasiorowski L.
Institution
Department of Thoracic Surgery, K. Marcinkowski University of Medical Sciences, Ul. Szamarzewskiego 62, Poznan, Poland.
Title
Early post-pneumonectomy complications in the elderly.
Source
European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 17(3):246-50, 2000 Mar.
Local Messages
JOURNAL AT TG LIBRARY – CHECK JOURNAL LIST
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The surgical treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in elderly patients presents a serious challenge to thoracic surgeons. As there is considerable divergence of opinion about both the mortality and morbidity rates, it is important to set guidelines for proper patient selection. METHODS: Early post-operative complications in 42 patients aged over 70 years who had undergone pneumonectomy because of NSCLC (Group I) were analyzed. The control group (Group II) consisted of 48 patients, also aged over 70 years, but who had undergone lobectomy or wedge resections. In both groups, the pre-operative conditions and 30-day morbidity and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Postoperative complications occurred significantly more frequently in pneumonectomy patients (78.5%) than in Group II (58%). Transient or long-standing arrhythmias were noted in 20 patients (47.6%) from Group I and in 17 (35.4%) from Group II. Pulmonary complications occurred in 17 patients (40.4%)!
from Group I and 16 (33.3%) from Group II. The most important factors contributing to post-operative complications in pneumonectomy patients were performance status (WHO), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and elevated level of blood urea nitrogen (BUN). The highest impact on early mortality in pneumonectomy patients was exerted by COPD, arterial hypertension, formation of broncho-pleural fistula (BPF), the need for re-thoracotomy and high level of BUN. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Pneumonectomy in patients over the age of 70 carries a considerable risk of severe post-operative complications and death, when compared to patients with less extensive pulmonary resections. (2) Elderly patients with impaired Performance Status (WHO 2 or more) and co-existing arterial hypertension, COPD and elevated level of BUN should be considered for pneumonectomy very carefully and cautiously.

Peter D. Slinger, MD, FRCPC,
Associate Professor of Anesthesia , University of Toronto,
and The University Health Network

Michael R. Johnston, MD, FRCSC,
Associate Professor of Surgery, University of Toronto,
and The University Health Network
Key Words: Anesthesia, Thoracic. Preoperative assessment. Pulmonary function. Respiratory function. Surgery, Thoracic.

Preoperative anesthetic assessment prior to chest surgery is a continually evolving science and art. Recent advances in anesthetic management, surgical techniques and perioperative care have expanded the envelope of patients now considered to be “operable” (see Fig.1)1. This article is an update on pre-anesthetic assessment for pulmonary resection surgery in cancer patients. Continue Reading »