A recent Cardiothoracic Surgery digest,
as sent to subscribers

Study Type: Retrospective cohort study (US Veterans Affairs database, 121 centres, 2006–2024).

Key Question: Among patients with clinical stage I NSCLC and exactly one missed lymph node station, does missing an N1 versus an N2 station differ in its association with survival and recurrence?

Key Findings:

• Of 4,227 patients, 11.8% had a missed N1 station; this was far more common with wedge resection (54.5% vs 15.6%, p<0.0001).
• Missed N1 was associated with worse overall survival (5-year 53.6% vs 64.4%; aHR 1.30, 95% CI 1.14–1.48), despite lower pathological upstaging (10.5% vs 15.5%).
• Recurrence was higher with missed N1 on univariate analysis (5-year 28.4% vs 23.9%, p=0.040) but not after multivariable adjustment.

Clinical Relevance: Supports routine hilar (N1) sampling during sublobar resection, as missed N1 disease may lead to undetected nodal involvement and omission of adjuvant therapy, which is relevant to UK early-stage lung cancer pathways.

Limitations: Observational design in a predominantly male (95.2%) veteran population limits generalisability to UK practice, and residual confounding (e.g. comorbidity, reasons for incomplete sampling) cannot be excluded.

Study Type: Retrospective single-centre cohort study (1993–2025).

Key Question: What are the early and late outcomes of total arch replacement (TAR) in patients with prior aortic surgery, and what predicts late mortality?

Key Findings:

• Among 219 reoperative TARs, early mortality fell from 14.6% (1993–2010) to 3.9% (2011–2025; p=0.009); stroke fell from 12.2% to 4.0% (p=0.037). Annual volume rose more than fourfold.
• Survival was 74.7% at 5 years and 61.3% at 10 years. Late mortality predictors: emergency surgery (HR 6.87, 95% CI 2.22–21.24), renal failure (HR 4.28, 1.36–13.45), moderate/severe COPD (HR 2.42, 1.00–5.83), age (HR 1.04/year), and circulatory arrest time (HR 1.01/minute).
• Extent of prior operation and concomitant root surgery did not affect outcomes.

Clinical Relevance: In high-volume centres, reoperative TAR appears increasingly safe, supporting elective intervention before emergency presentation and informing risk counselling and patient selection in UK aortic services.

Limitations: Single-centre, 32-year retrospective design with era-related changes in technique and perioperative care, limiting generalisability and causal inference on temporal improvement.

Study Type: Narrative review (PubMed/MEDLINE search with reference-list review, supplemented by senior author's experience); no systematic methodology or quality appraisal described.

Key Question: How do the different minimally invasive thymectomy approaches (lateral thoracoscopic/robotic, subxiphoid) compare in risks, benefits and suitability for specific indications?

Key Findings:

• Minimally invasive approaches are reported as safe and effective versus open thymectomy, with shorter length of stay, better pain control and earlier return to work (no effect sizes given in the abstract).
• A left-sided approach may offer some advantage over right-sided, particularly in myasthenia gravis; subxiphoid access may give superior visualisation to either lateral route.
• Single-port robotic subxiphoid thymectomy is described as promising but at an early stage of adoption.

Clinical Relevance: Offers a framework for approach selection as UK thoracic units expand minimally invasive and robotic thymic surgery, though the abstract provides no oncological or neurological outcome data to guide it.

Limitations: Narrative design with no defined search strategy or bias assessment, and conclusions partly rest on single-author experience, so approach-specific claims are low-certainty.

Study Type: Multicentre retrospective registry cohort study (Netherlands Heart Registration, 12 centres, 2012–2020).

Key Question: What are the procedural outcomes and long-term survival of septal myectomy with concomitant AVR in HCM patients with aortic stenosis?

Key Findings:

• Resting LVOT gradient fell from 73±27 to 12±12 mmHg (n=94; median age 72 years; 54% had additional concomitant procedures).
• Permanent pacemaker implantation 13%; VSD 1%.
• Unadjusted survival 90% at 1 year and 71% (95% CI 59–84) at 6 years, versus 83% (95% CI 70–97) expected in the age- and sex-matched general population, though the confidence intervals overlap.

Clinical Relevance: Supports combined myectomy and AVR as effective for relieving obstruction in older HCM patients with aortic stenosis, but pacing risk and possible excess long-term mortality should inform consent and follow-up.

Limitations: Small, non-comparative cohort without a control group (e.g., AVR alone or TAVI), so the survival comparison is unadjusted for comorbidity and cannot be attributed to the procedure itself.

Study Type: Narrative review (no systematic search or pooled analysis described).

Key Question: What does current evidence support as best practice for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery, from patient selection through to perioperative care and training?

Key Findings:

• Compared with sternotomy, MI-MVS is reported to reduce surgical trauma, length of stay and infection rates, with faster recovery; no effect sizes or confidence intervals are given in the abstract.
• Video-assisted right mini-thoracotomy is the most widely used approach; fully endoscopic and robotic techniques are increasing in use.
• Routine preoperative contrast-enhanced CT is reported to improve patient selection and procedural planning and reduce stroke risk.

Clinical Relevance: The emphasis on CT-guided selection, ERAS integration and structured mentorship is directly relevant to UK units developing or auditing MI-MVS programmes and training pathways.

Limitations: As a narrative review, it carries risk of selection and publication bias, and the abstract provides no quantitative data or comparative outcomes (e.g., repair rates, mortality, long-term durability).

Study Type: Narrative review (structured literature search of Undermind and PubMed; no quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis).

Key Question: How should tumour biology and technical quality, rather than size alone, guide the choice between lobectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection in early-stage NSCLC?

Key Findings:

• Segmentectomy gives excellent outcomes with adequate margins, anatomical completeness and rigorous nodal assessment; GGO-dominant tumours with low CTR are the strongest candidates for parenchymal preservation.
• Higher CTR, pure-solid morphology, larger size, high FDG uptake, micropapillary/solid histology, STAS, VPI and LVI indicate higher-risk phenotypes. No single feature consistently shows a survival benefit from lobectomy, but micropapillary component >~5%, STAS, inadequate margins, incomplete staging or multiple adverse features favour lobectomy.
• Segmentectomy is generally preferred over wedge resection for solid, deeper or aggressive lesions; wedge remains reasonable for small, peripheral, GGO-dominant tumours.

Clinical Relevance: Supports MDT discussion that treats trial eligibility (≤2 cm, peripheral, node-negative) as a starting point and cautions against extending trial results to unselected cT1c or biologically aggressive tumours.

Limitations: Narrative synthesis without stated appraisal methodology or pooled effect estimates, and the proposed integrated selection models remain unvalidated prospectively.

Study Type: Multicentre, two-centre, randomised controlled trial (n=268)

Key Question: Does autologous blood pleurodesis (ABP) on postoperative day 1 reduce chest drain duration in patients with air leak (>40 ml/min) after elective VATS?

Key Findings:

• Median chest drain duration was 3.4 days (95% CI 3.0–4.9) with ABP versus 5.0 days (95% CI 4.0–6.8) with standard care (p=0.007).
• ABP increased the rate of drain removal (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.11–2.01); by day 7, drains were removed in 74% vs 62%.
• Effect was consistent across both centres. Population was predominantly lobectomy (238/268).

Clinical Relevance: ABP is a simple, low-cost option that could reduce drain time and length of stay, and merits consideration within UK ERAS thoracic pathways.

Limitations: Only two centres, few wedge resections (n=30), and patients with air leak beyond day 7 were censored, so outcomes in prolonged air leak (and complications such as empyema) are not clear from the abstract.

Study Type: Single-centre retrospective cohort study (n=589, surgery 2013–2019).

Key Question: Does a positive stapler lavage cytology (SLC) result during lung cancer surgery predict worse survival and recurrence?

Key Findings:

• 5-year overall survival was significantly lower in the SLC-positive group. The abstract does not report the actual rates, the number of SLC-positive patients, or hazard ratios.
• On univariable analysis, SLC positivity was associated with poorer OS and RFS, alongside pleural invasion, higher pT/pN stage and non-adenocarcinoma histology. No multivariable results are reported.
• All five recurrences in the SLC-positive group were local.

Clinical Relevance: SLC could be a simple intraoperative marker identifying patients at higher risk of local recurrence, though it is not part of routine UK practice and does not currently change management.

Limitations: Retrospective single-centre design with small SLC-positive numbers and no reported multivariable adjustment, so independent prognostic value remains unproven.