OBJECTIVES Our goal was to report the results of the first consensus paper among international experts in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UniVATS) lobectomy obtained through a Delphi process, the objective of which was to define and standardize the main procedural steps, optimize its indications and perioperative management and identify elements to assist in future training. METHODS The 40 members of the working group were convened and organized on a voluntary basis by the Uniportal VATS Interest Group (UVIG) of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS). An e-consensus finding exercise using the Delphi method was applied to require 75% agreement for reaching consensus on each question. Repeated iterations of anonymous voting continued for 3 rounds. RESULTS Overall, 31 international experts from 18 countries completed all 3 rounds of questionnaires. Although a technical quorum was not achieved, most of the responders agreed that the maximum size of a UniVATS incision should be ≤4 cm. Agreement was reached on many points outlining the currently accepted definition of a UniVATS lobectomy, its indications and contraindications, perioperative clinical management and recommendations for training and future research directions. CONCLUSIONS The UVIG Consensus Report stated that UniVATS offers a valid alternative to standard VATS techniques. Only longer follow-up and randomized controlled studies will predict whether UniVATS represents a valid alternative approach to multiport VATS for major lung resections or whether it should be performed only in selected cases and by selected centres. The next step for the ESTS UVIG is the establishment of a UniVATS section inside the ESTS databases.

Pulmonary resection by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery with single-lung ventilation has become a standardized modality over the last decades. With the aim to reduce surgical stress during operation procedures, some have adopted a uniportal approach in pulmonary resection as an alternative to multiportal VATS. The ERAS program has been widely spread to achieve even better outcomes. In 2004, Pompeo reported the resection of pulmonary modules by conventional VATS under intravenous anesthesia without endotracheal intubation. Within less than a decade thereafter, complete VATS pulmonary resections under anesthesia without endotracheal intubation had been reported for a range of thoracoscopic procedures. Avoiding tracheal intubation under general anesthesia can reduce the incidence of complications such as intubation-related airway trauma, residual neuromuscular blockade, ventilation-induced lung injury, impaired cardiac performance, and postoperative nausea. Numerous studies can be found especially from Asian countries, focusing on comparison of intubated and non-intubated procedures showing that non-intubated VATS could reduce the rate of postoperative complications, shorten hospital stay and decrease the perioperative mortality rate, indicating that non-intubated VATS is a safe, effective and feasible technique for thoracic disease. However, if we look closely at all studies, it is obvious that there are no significant differences between intubated and non-intubated surgery in terms of the standard procedures and maneuvers. In non-intubated procedures it can be less comfortable for the surgeon to manipulate in the thoracic cavity, but the procedural steps remain the same. All the differences between the intubated and non-intubated operation procedure are found in perioperative management of the patient. The patient is still in deep anesthesia during the procedure and hypecapnia can occur. It is easier to manage this if the patient is intubated. In addition, if a complication occurs during the operation and intubation is required, this can cause an emergent situation, which means that not all patients are suitable for such a procedure, especially those with severe emphysema, obese patients and those with a problematic oropharyngeal configuration-Mallampati score. Moreover, studies on non-intubated thoracic surgery point to shortened hospitalization, faster recovery etc. But there are also studies on intubated uniportal VATS procedures in combination with ERAS protocol showing shortened hospitalization and better outcome for patients. Currently, especially with the use of optical intubation canylas, totally intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), BIS and relaxometer, anesthesia is safe for avoiding airway injury, hypercapnia, and there is minimal risk of residual curarization as well as one of the postoperative lung complications such as microaspiration and atelectasis. In addition, the patient recovers rapidly from anesthesia and can be verticalised and mobilized a couple of hours after the operation. It is desirable to take into consideration what type of patient and what lung disease is suitable for non-intubated technique and what is more convenient for intubation.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to prove effi ciency of tracheal resection in the cohort of patients of our clinic and to introduce our own modifi cation of T-cannula as a surgical alternative if tracheal resection is contraindicated. BACKGROUND: Benign tracheal stenosis, the most often represented by post tracheostomy (PTTS) and post intubation (PITS) stenosis, is a rare, but serious and potentially life-threatening medical condition. We present our experience with the management of the patients, who were referred with a benign tracheal stenosis. METHODS: In the retrospective study, patient's outcome was evaluated after tracheal resection or treatment with T-cannula from all the patients presented with a benign tracheal stenosis from January 2015 to January 2021. RESULTS: The cohort consists of forty-eight patients. Thirty-one (64,6 %) patients underwent a tracheal resection and seventeen (35,4 %) were treated with tracheostomy and T-tube insertion. In the series of patients after tracheal resection, we observed no mortality, complications occurred in ten (32,2 %) patients. They were spread proportionally; anastomotic complications were noticed in 5 (16,1 %) patients, as well as non-anastomotic complications. CONCLUSION: Tracheal resection is a safe and effective procedure with good results. T-tube insertion presents a surgical alternative if bronchoscopy is unavailable or failed (Tab. 4, Fig. 2, Ref. 20).