Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2006 Oct 18:(4):CD001001.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001001.pub2.

Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema

L U Tiong et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

  • Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema.
    van Agteren JE, Carson KV, Tiong LU, Smith BJ. van Agteren JE, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 14;10(10):CD001001. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001001.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27739074 Free PMC article.

Abstract

Background: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been re-introduced for treating patients with severe diffuse emphysema. It is a procedure that aims to improve long-term daily functioning, although it is costly and may also be associated with a high risk of mortality.

Objectives: To assemble evidence from randomised controlled trials for the effectiveness of LVRS, and identify optimal surgical techniques.

Search strategy: Randomised controlled trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) register. Searches are current to September 2005.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials that studied the safety and efficacy of LVRS in patients with diffuse emphysema were included. Studies were excluded if they investigated giant or bullous emphysema.

Data collection and analysis: Two independent review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data. Where possible, data from more than one study were combined using RevMan 4.2 software.

Main results: Eight studies (1663 participants) met the entry criteria of the review. One study accounted for 73% of the participants recruited. Study quality was high, although blinding in studies was not possible. Ninety day mortality was significantly greater in all those who underwent LVRS (odds ratio 6.57 (95% CI 3.34 to 12.95), four studies, N = 1415). A subgroup analysis by risk status suggested that there was a subgroup of participants who were consistently at a significant risk of death, although this was only measured in one large study. The ninety day mortality data indicated that death was more likely with LVRS irrespective of risk status identified in one large study. Improvements in lung function, quality of life and exercise capacity were more likely with LVRS than with usual follow-up.

Authors' conclusions: The evidence summarised in this review is drawn from one large study, and several smaller trials. The findings from the large study indicated that in patients who survive up to three months post-surgery, there were significantly better health status and lung function outcomes in favour of surgery compared with usual medical care. Patients identified post hoc as being of high risk of death from surgery were those with particularly impaired lung function and poor diffusing capacity and/or homogenous emphysema. Further research should address the effect of this intervention on exacerbations and rate of decline in lung function and health status.

PubMed Disclaimer

Update of

LinkOut - more resources