2016
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivw004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outcomes of minimally invasive lung transplantation in a single centre: the routine approach for the future or do we still need clamshell incision?

Abstract: MILT was successfully introduced at our centre as a novel operative strategy. Despite longer ischaemic times and a more complex operation and management, MILT appears to offer early postoperative and mid-term clinical benefits compared with our traditional approach of clamshell operations. These observations warrant larger definite studies to further evaluate the impact of MILT on physiological, clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
(34 reference statements)
1
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Patients treated with the minimally invasive lung transplantation (MILT) approach (n = 70) were compared with those treated with the clamshell operative approach (n = 124) in a single-center study of LTXs performed between 2010 and 2013. 48 The MILT approach was associated with longer ischemic times; however, the number of blood transfusions, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU stay were significantly less and PFTs were significantly better with the MILT approach. Overall survival rates were similar, and the author concluded that the MILT approach may offer potential benefits on early outcomes for LTX.…”
Section: Intraoperative Interventions and Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Patients treated with the minimally invasive lung transplantation (MILT) approach (n = 70) were compared with those treated with the clamshell operative approach (n = 124) in a single-center study of LTXs performed between 2010 and 2013. 48 The MILT approach was associated with longer ischemic times; however, the number of blood transfusions, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU stay were significantly less and PFTs were significantly better with the MILT approach. Overall survival rates were similar, and the author concluded that the MILT approach may offer potential benefits on early outcomes for LTX.…”
Section: Intraoperative Interventions and Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The study was not designed to elucidate the clinical determinants of PGD, however, no obvious donor or recipient characteristic was associated with the development of PGD. Intraoperative factors such as cardiopulmonary bypass and invasiveness of surgery were investigated, as these aspects have been suggested as potential risk factors 5 , 36 . Though not statistically significant, there was a tendency for higher use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) in the severe PGD group, which is in-line with previous literature data 5 and our own wider experience 36 , 37 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 a). Marczin et al also conclude that patients receiving minimally invasive lung transplantation (MILT) seem to have better lung function in the early postoperative duration than those undergoing traditional transverse sternotomy, although the operation and management may be more complex 11 .
Figure 3 Life images of child patients.
…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%