Minimally Invasive Pneumonectomy vs Open Pneumonectomy: Outcomes and Predictors of Conversion.

Background: In the modern era, whether minimally invasive pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) provides a survival advantage over open pneumonectomy is unknown.

Methods: Patients who underwent pneumonectomy for NSCLC between 2015 and 2020 were queried from the National Cancer Database. Surgical approach was categorized as robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS), video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), or open pneumonectomy on an intention-to-treat basis. Propensity score matching was performed to balance patient cohorts. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to examine the association between surgical approach and 30- and 90-day mortality, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess overall survival.

Results: We identified 3784 patients, including 73% open (n = 2776), 19% VATS (n = 725), and 8% RATS (n = 283). The overall conversion rate from minimally invasive to open was 29.5% (n = 298). After propensity matching 212 patients per cohort, there were no differences between open, VATS, and RATS 30-day (9.4% vs 8.5% vs 7.5%, respectively; P = .807) or 90-day mortality (14.2% vs 12.3% vs 10.4%, respectively; P = .516). Median overall survival was similar among open (48 months; 95% CI, 35.6-64.1 months), VATS (51.0 months; 95% CI, 34.9-72.3 months), and RATS approaches (50 months; 95% CI, 42.6-NA months; P = .560). Multivariate analysis of the matched cohort found no association between approach and overall survival. RATS (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.94; P = .020) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio, 0.52, 95% CI, 0.27-0.98; P = .045) were found to be protective against conversion to open.

Conclusions: Minimally invasive pneumonectomy can be performed with short-term and long-term survival that are equivalent to open pneumonectomy.