Vein-first versus artery-first ligation procedure for lung cancer surgery: An updated review

The optimal sequence of pulmonary vessel interruption during lung cancer resection remains controversial. This review aimed to elucidate the association of vein-first versus artery-first ligation and survival of the patients.

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to September 2021 for published articles that compared vein-first (the pulmonary vein was interrupted first) and artery-first procedure (the pulmonary artery was ligated first) during lung cancer surgery.

Finally, a total of 13 full articles were obtained. First, 7 studies with survival information were included for meta-analyses. As compared with the artery-first ligation, vein-first approach did not decrease the risk of local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 0.92 in favour of vein-first; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-1.39, p = 0.68) or distant metastasis (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.30-2.85, p = 0.89); but it was associated with better disease-free survival (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.37-0.73, p < 0.01) as well as 5-year overall survival (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.41-0.86, p < 0.01). In addition, the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total complications, and length of postoperative stay were mainly comparable between the two groups. Second, 7 studies provided the data of tumor cells indicated by different biomarkers and detection methods; and 3 of these reports showed that vein-first ligation decreased the extent of intraoperative tumor dissemination. However, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity.

Vein-first ligation in lung cancer surgery may be associated with improved survival of the patients, which might be ascribed to potentially lower risk of tumor cell dissemination. Well-designed, large-scale trials are warranted to clarify these occasional findings.