Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026
Targeting Pulmonary Nodules Prior to Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery: Comparison of Two Different Techniques.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Galvaing Geraud, Barthelemy Yann, Brehant Julien, Rouze Simon, Chadeyras Jean-Baptiste, Naamee Adel, d'Ostrevy Nicolas, Filaire Marc
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The increasing use of CT imaging and the implementation of lung cancer screening have led to a rising detection of pulmonary nodules. Accurate management requires reliable localization techniques enabling pathological diagnosis and potential curative resection. This study compared hook-wire localization and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided detection in terms of diagnostic yield.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in 2 French academic centres, including 260 patients with 266 nodules (January 2012-May 2019). The primary end-point was diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of successfully localized nodules. Secondary end-points included localization and operative times, peri- and postoperative complications, chest tube duration, and hospital stay.
RESULTS: Diagnostic yield was 88.0% with hook-wire localization and 96.9% with CBCT, corresponding to an absolute difference of 8.9% (95% CI, -0.2 to 17.9; P = .053). Complication rates (P = .63), drainage duration (P = .13), and hospital stay (P = .16) did not differ between groups. Operative time (P = .042) and localization time (P = .001) were significantly longer with CBCT and hook-wire, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Hook-wire and CBCT localization demonstrated comparable diagnostic yields and acceptable safety profiles. CBCT required longer operative room utilization, whereas hook-wire placement was performed in the radiology department, saving resources for other surgeries.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in 2 French academic centres, including 260 patients with 266 nodules (January 2012-May 2019). The primary end-point was diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of successfully localized nodules. Secondary end-points included localization and operative times, peri- and postoperative complications, chest tube duration, and hospital stay.
RESULTS: Diagnostic yield was 88.0% with hook-wire localization and 96.9% with CBCT, corresponding to an absolute difference of 8.9% (95% CI, -0.2 to 17.9; P = .053). Complication rates (P = .63), drainage duration (P = .13), and hospital stay (P = .16) did not differ between groups. Operative time (P = .042) and localization time (P = .001) were significantly longer with CBCT and hook-wire, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Hook-wire and CBCT localization demonstrated comparable diagnostic yields and acceptable safety profiles. CBCT required longer operative room utilization, whereas hook-wire placement was performed in the radiology department, saving resources for other surgeries.