Differential Outcomes of VATS and Open Surgery in Lung Cancer Patients with Antecedent Oncological Diagnoses.

Primary lung cancer is a devastating disease with high morbidity and mortality rates. Patients with a previous oncological history may present with multiple comorbidities, unique clinical features, and unique outcomes after surgical intervention for primary lung cancer. This study aimed to compare the clinical features and outcomes of patients with a previous oncological history who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or open surgery (OS) for primary lung cancer. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 84 patients with a previous oncological history who underwent surgical intervention for primary lung cancer between January 2018 and January 2023. Among them, 55 patients underwent VATS, while 29 patients underwent OS. Demographic and clinical characteristics, perioperative variables, and postoperative outcomes of the two surgical groups were collected and compared. Most of the 84 patients were women (58.4%) with a high smoking prevalence (44.1%) and a median of 32.3 packs-year. The patients' histories were most predominant for gynecologic cancers (44.4%) and colorectal cancers (18.6%). The results showed that the VATS group had a significantly shorter median hospital stay than the OS group (6.0 days vs. 12.0 days, -value < 0.001). Additionally, the VATS group had lower incidences of air leaks 24 h post-surgery (12.7% vs. 48.3%, -value < 0.001) and intractable pain (3.6% vs. 17.2%, -value = 0.031), as well as significantly lower operative times (270 min vs. 350 min, -value = 0.046). However, there were no significant differences between the VATS and OS groups in overall survival (log-rank -value = 0.447). Furthermore, although the 3-month survival was significantly higher in the VATS group (98.2% vs. 79.3%, -value = 0.003), only one patient from the VATS group (1.8%) and two patients from the OS group (6.9%) were still alive five years after the intervention. In conclusion, VATS is a safe and effective surgical option for patients with a previous oncological history who require surgical intervention for primary lung cancer, with shorter operative times, shorter hospital stays, and lower rates of complications compared to those of OS patients, without compromising oncological outcomes. Nevertheless, both surgical options failed to improve the 5-year survival rate, probably due to the high prevalence of comorbidities and the burden of previous cancer in this population.