Background: Minimally invasive (MI) approaches to lung transplantation (LTx) offer the prospect of faster recovery compared to traditional incisions, however, little data exist describing the impact of surgical technique on early outcomes and analgesia use.
Methods: A prospectively maintained institutional registry identified 170 patients who underwent LTx between January, 2017 and June, 2022. Post-COVID acute respiratory distress syndrome, repeat, and multiorgan transplants were excluded (n = 27) leaving 37 MILTx and 106 traditional LTx patients. Propensity score matching by age, sex, body mass index, diagnosis, lung allocation score, double vs. single lung, hypertension, diabetes, and hospitalization status created 37 pairs.
Results: Before matching, MILTx patients were more often male (70% vs 43%) and more likely to receive grafts from younger (31 vs 42 years), circulatory death donors (19% vs 6%) compared with traditional LTx patients (all p < 0.05). After matching, there were no differences in graft warm ischemia or operative duration (both p > 0.05). Postoperatively, MILTx experienced shorter intensive care unit (ICU) (4.3 [IQR 3.1-5.5] vs 8.2 [IQR 3.7-10.8] days) and hospital lengths of stay (LOS) (13 [IQR 11-15] vs 17 [IQR 12-25] days) (both p < 0.05). Among patients surviving to discharge, MILTx patients required fewer opioid prescriptions at discharge (38% vs 66%, p = 0.008) and had improved pulmonary function at 3 months (Forced expiratory volume in 1 second 82 [IQR 72-102] vs 77 [IQR 52-88]% predicted; forced vital capacity 78 [IQR 65-92] vs 70 [IQR 62-80]% predicted] (both p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Minimally invasive LTx techniques demonstrate potential advantages over traditional approaches, including reduced ICU and hospital LOS, lower opioid use on discharge, and improved early pulmonary function.
Keywords: lung transplantation; minimally invasive; opioid use; postoperative recovery; pulmonary function.
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.