Key result
Percutaneous veno-venous bypass safely maintains oxygenation and surgical exposure during carinal reconstruction.
Why the study?
Alternative respiratory support methods are needed for difficult carinal reconstruction during surgery for advanced lung cancer.
Does veno-venous bypass provide safe and useful respiratory support in patients undergoing carinal reconstruction for advanced lung cancer?
Case Report (n=2)
Does veno-venous bypass provide safe and useful respiratory support in patients undergoing carinal reconstruction for advanced lung cancer?
Veno-venous bypass using a percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass system is a safe and useful alternative adjunct for respiratory support during difficult carinal reconstruction.
VV bypass appeared safe for carinal reconstruction in two cases; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before wider use.
We report two patients who underwent carinal resection and reconstruction for advanced lung cancer under veno-venous bypass. The bypass system consisted of a centrifugal pump and a hollow-fiber membrane oxygenator, and was established by percutaneous insertion of cannulas through the femoral veins using the Seldinger technique. This respiratory support system under veno-venous bypass was safe and useful for carinal reconstruction, providing a good visual field and adequate oxygenation. Although other standard accepted ventilation techniques can be used for carinal resection, veno-venous bypass is an alternative adjunct in cases involving difficult carinal reconstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Horita et al. (1996) conducted a case report in Advanced lung cancer (n=2). Veno-venous bypass using a percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass system was evaluated on Safety and usefulness (visual field and oxygenation). Veno-venous bypass using a percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass system was safe and useful for carinal reconstruction in two patients, providing a good visual field and adequate oxygenation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: