Clinical Analysis of Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Resection of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules and Influencing Factors in the Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Nodules

Abstract

Purpose. This is a retrospective research comparing the clinical outcomes of single-hole versus multi-hole video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical (VATS) resection for solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) and examining the factors influencing the diagnosis of benign and malignant pulmonary nodules. Method. We collected the clinical data, surgical status, outcomes, and corresponding imaging features of 317 patients with SPN who were surgically resected by VATS and diagnosed as benign or malignant by pathology in our hospital from January 2019 to December 2021. Result. Among the 317 patients, 124 (39.12%) underwent single-port VATS and 193 (60.88%) underwent multiple-hole VATS. All patients were grouped according to the different surgical methods, and their postoperative indicators were statistically analyzed. The results showed that neither the single-port VATS group nor the multi-port VATS group had any serious adverse events such as death during the perioperative period. The average operation time, intraoperative blood loss, drainage tube indwelling time, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly lower in the two groups. Statistics of postoperative pathological diagnosis showed that 98 cases (30.91%) of all nodules were benign nodules and 219 cases (69.09%) were malignant nodules, and a further single-multivariate analysis showed that age, nodule maximum diameter, lobular sign, burr sign, vascular cluster sign, and pleural depression sign were independent relevant factors for the diagnosis of benign and malignant nodules. Conclusion. VATS is less invasive and has fewer complications and is of great clinical value for both diagnosis and treatment of benign and malignant SPN. Age, maximum nodal diameter, lobar sign, burr sign, vascular set sign, and pleural depression sign were independent correlates affecting the diagnosis of benign and malignant SPN, which reminds that great attention should be paid to patients who are older and have risk factors on imaging, and early and timely active treatment or close follow-up should be carried out.

Lu’s approach for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

“…In 2011, Gonzalez-Rivas reported the first case of UVATS lobectomy [ 10 ]. UVATS represents a further development of classic VATS under the concept of minimally invasive and rapid recovery, with advantages such as reduced incision size, improved field of view, and reduced chest wall and intercostal nerve injuries compared to multi-port VATS [ 11 ]. However, UVATS also presents challenges due to restrictions on the instruments used, including the thoracoscope [ 12 ].…”

Innovative Techniques in Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: Lu’s Approach

“… 6 Subsequent research has shown UVATS to be preferable to multi-portal VATS, 7 , 8 offering benefits like less blood loss and quicker postoperative recovery. 9 , 10 However, UVATS faces scrutiny over technical challenges, particularly the limited space from a single-port entry that can affect instrument handling, leading to issues with bleeding control, suturing, and clear visualization. 11 , 12 These limitations can extend the learning period and increase the complexity of the procedure.…”

Retracted: Clinical Analysis of Video‐Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Resection of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules and Influencing Factors in the Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Nodules

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”

“…Tis article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. Tis investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process:…”