MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after lobectomy due to non-small cell lung cancer - a single-center retrospective study.
Author: Klimczak M, Piekielny D, Antczak A, Śmigielski J, Tworek D.
Journal: Adv Respir Med; 2021; 89(3):247-253. PubMed ID: 34196376.
Abstract:
INTRODUCTION: The procedure of lung parenchyma resection may result in impairment of physical capacity and quality of life. In patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), lobectomy is an elective procedure. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common coexisting condition in patients with NSCLC. Effectiveness of post-operative pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in patients who underwent lobectomy due to NSCLC and suffering from COPD as compared to individuals without COPD has not been determined yet. The aim of the study was to compare effectiveness of post-operative PR in patients with COPD after lobectomy due to NSCLC (COPD[+] L [+]) with individuals with COPD without lung parenchyma resection (COPD(+) L(-)) and those who underwent lobectomy due to NSCLC and not suffering from COPD (COPD[-] L[+]). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with non-small cell lung cancer (21 patients with and 16 patients without COPD) who underwent lobectomy and 29 subjects with COPD referred to the Lung Diseases Treatment and Rehabilitation Centre in Lodz in 2018-2019 were included in this retrospective analysis. The patients participated in a 3-week inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program which included breathing exercises, physical workout, relaxation exercises, education, psychological support and nutrition consulting. The evaluation included lung function measurements, six-minute walking test (6MWT) and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score. The results obtained before the rehabilitation were compared to those achieved after the 3-week PR program and compared between the study groups. RESULTS: A significant increase in the distance covered during 6MWT was observed in all the three groups studied: COPD(+) L(+) (Δ = 62.52 ± 14.58 m); COPD(-) L(+) (Δ = 73.67 ± 11.58 m); and COPD(+) L(-) (Δ = 59.93 ± 10.02 m) (p < 0.001 for all). Similarly, a statistically and clinically significant improvement in the total SGRQ score was recorded: COPD(+) L(+) ∆ = -12.05 ± 3.96 points; p < 0.05 and COPD(-) L(+) ∆ = -12.30 ± 4.85 points; p < 0.01 and COPD(+) (L-) ∆= -14.07 ± 3.36 points (p < 0.001). No significant differences in the outcome improvement between the study groups were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study show that COPD(+) L(+) patients gained benefits from post-operative PR comparable to COPD(+) L(-) and COPD(-) L(+) subjects by improving their physical capacity and quality of life.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]