We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, NON-P.H.S.
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, P.H.S.
Long-term follow-up of patients receiving lung-volume-reduction surgery versus medical therapy for severe emphysema by the National Emphysema Treatment Trial Research Group.
Annals of Thoracic Surgery 2006 August
BACKGROUND: The National Emphysema Treatment Trial defined subgroups of patients with severe emphysema in whom lung-volume-reduction surgery (LVRS) improved survival and function at 2 years. Two additional years of follow-up provide valuable information regarding durability.
METHODS: A total of 1218 patients with severe emphysema were randomized to receive LVRS or medical treatment. We present updated analyses (4.3 versus 2.4 years median follow-up), including 40% more patients with functional measures 2 years after randomization.
RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis of 1218 randomized patients demonstrates an overall survival advantage for LVRS, with a 5-year risk ratio (RR) for death of 0.86 (p = 0.02). Improvement was more likely in the LVRS than in the medical group for maximal exercise through 3 years and for health-related quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]) through 4 years. Updated comparisons of survival and functional improvement were consistent with initial results for four clinical subgroups of non-high-risk patients defined by upper-lobe predominance and exercise capacity. After LVRS, the upper-lobe patients with low exercise capacity demonstrated improved survival (5-year RR, 0.67; p = 0.003), exercise throughout 3 years (p < 0.001), and symptoms (SGRQ) through 5 years (p < 0.001 years 1 to 3, p = 0.01 year 5). Upper-lobe-predominant and high-exercise-capacity LVRS patients obtained no survival advantage but were likely to improve exercise capacity (p < 0.01 years 1 to 3) and SGRQ (p < 0.01 years 1 to 4).
CONCLUSIONS: Effects of LVRS are durable, and it can be recommended for upper-lobe-predominant emphysema patients with low exercise capacity and should be considered for palliation in patients with upper-lobe emphysema and high exercise capacity.
METHODS: A total of 1218 patients with severe emphysema were randomized to receive LVRS or medical treatment. We present updated analyses (4.3 versus 2.4 years median follow-up), including 40% more patients with functional measures 2 years after randomization.
RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis of 1218 randomized patients demonstrates an overall survival advantage for LVRS, with a 5-year risk ratio (RR) for death of 0.86 (p = 0.02). Improvement was more likely in the LVRS than in the medical group for maximal exercise through 3 years and for health-related quality of life (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]) through 4 years. Updated comparisons of survival and functional improvement were consistent with initial results for four clinical subgroups of non-high-risk patients defined by upper-lobe predominance and exercise capacity. After LVRS, the upper-lobe patients with low exercise capacity demonstrated improved survival (5-year RR, 0.67; p = 0.003), exercise throughout 3 years (p < 0.001), and symptoms (SGRQ) through 5 years (p < 0.001 years 1 to 3, p = 0.01 year 5). Upper-lobe-predominant and high-exercise-capacity LVRS patients obtained no survival advantage but were likely to improve exercise capacity (p < 0.01 years 1 to 3) and SGRQ (p < 0.01 years 1 to 4).
CONCLUSIONS: Effects of LVRS are durable, and it can be recommended for upper-lobe-predominant emphysema patients with low exercise capacity and should be considered for palliation in patients with upper-lobe emphysema and high exercise capacity.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app