Sublobar Resection In Patients Research Articles

Outcomes of Completion Lobectomy for Locoregional Recurrence after Sublobar Resection in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

This retrospective study aimed to determine the treatment patterns and the surgical and oncologic outcomes after completion lobectomy (CL) in patients with locoregionally recurrent stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who previously underwent sublobar resection. Data from 36 patients who initially underwent sublobar resection for clinical, pathological stage IA NSCLC and experienced locoregional recurrence between 2008 and 2016 were analyzed. Thirty-six (3.6%) of 1,003 patients who underwent sublobar resection for NSCLC experienced locoregional recurrence. The patients' median age was 66.5 (range, 44-77) years at the initial operation, and 28 (77.8%) patients were men. Six (16.7%) patients underwent segmentectomy and 30 (83.3%) underwent wedge resection as the initial operation. The median follow-up from the initial operation was 56 (range, 9-150) months. Ten (27.8%) patients underwent CL, 22 (61.1%) underwent non-surgical treatments (chemotherapy, radiation, concurrent chemoradiation therapy), and 4 (11.1%) did not receive treatment or were lost to follow-up after recurrence. Patients who underwent CL experienced no significant complications or deaths. The median follow-up time after CL was 64.5 (range, 19-93) months. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and post-recurrence survival (PRS) were higher in the surgical group than in the non-surgical (p<0.001) and no-treatment groups (p<0.001). CL is a technically demanding but safe procedure for locoregionally recurrent stage I NSCLC after sublobar resection. Patients who underwent CL had better OS and PRS than patients who underwent non-surgical treatments or no treatments; however, a larger cohort study and long-term surveillance are necessary.

Segmentectomy for patients with early-stage pure-solid non-small cell lung cancer.

For decades, lobectomy has been the recommended surgical procedure for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), including for small-sized lesions. However, two recent pivotal clinical trials conducted by the Japanese Clinical Oncology Group/West Japan Oncology Group (JCOG0802/WJOG4607L) and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB140503), which compared the survival outcomes between lobectomy and sublobar resection (the JCOG0802/WJOG4607L included only segmentectomy, not wedge resection), demonstrated the efficacy of sublobar resection in patients with early-stage peripheral lung cancer measuring ≤ 2 cm. The JCOG0802/WJOG4607L demonstrated the superiority of segmentectomy over lobectomy with respect to overall survival, implying the survival benefit conferred by preservation of the lung parenchyma. Subsequently, the JCOG1211 also demonstrated the efficacy of segmentectomy, even for NSCLC, measuring up to 3 cm with the predominant ground-glass opacity phenotype. Segmentectomy has become the standard of care for early-stage NSCLC and its indications are expected to be further expanded to include solid lung cancers > 2 cm. However, local control is still a major concern for segmentectomy for higher-grade malignant tumors. Thus, the indications of segmentectomy, especially for patients with radiologically pure-solid NSCLC, remain controversial due to the aggressive nature of the malignancy. In this study, we reviewed previous studies and discussed the efficacy of segmentectomy for patients with such tumors.

Development and validation of a nomogram based on preoperative variables for predicting recurrence-free survival in stage IA lung adenocarcinoma.

This study aimed to establish a nomogram for predicting risk of recurrence and provide a model for decision-making between lobectomy and sublobar resection in patients with stage IA lung adenocarcinoma. Patients diagnosed with stage IA lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) between December 2010 and October 2018 from Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences were included. Patients were randomly assigned to training and validation cohorts, accounting for 70% and 30% of the total cases, respectively. We collected laboratory variables before surgery. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed in the training cohort to identify variables significantly associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS) which were subsequently used to construct a nomogram. Validation was conducted in both cohorts. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the optional cutoff values of the scores calculated from the nomogram. Patients were then divided into low- and high-risk groups. Survival was performed to determine if the nomogram could guide the operation method. A total of 543 patients were included in this study. Gender, albumin level, carcinoembryonic antigen level and cytokeratin-19-fragment level were included in the nomogram. In both cohorts, the nomogram stratified the patients into high- and low-risk groups in terms of RFS. In particular, there was a significant difference in RFS between lobectomy and sublobar resection in the high-risk group. Gender, albumin level, carcinoembryonic antigen level and cytokeratin-19-fragment level are valuable markers in predicting recurrence and can guide surgical practice in patients with stage IA LUAD.

Sublobar resection in non-small cell lung cancer: patient selection criteria and risk factors for recurrence.

To validate selection criteria for sublobar resection in patients with lung cancer with respect to recurrence, and to investigate predictors for recurrence in patients for whom the criteria are not suitable. Patients who underwent sublobar resection for lung cancer between July 2010 and December 2018 were retrospectively included. The criteria for curative sublobar resection were consolidation-to-tumor ratio ≤0.50 and size ≤3.0 cm in tumors with a ground-glass opacity (GGO) component (GGO group), and size of ≤2.0 cm and volume doubling time ≥400 days in solid tumors (solid group). Cox regression was used to identify predictors for time-to-recurrence (TTR) in tumors outside of these criteria (non-curative group). Out of 530 patients, 353 were classified into the GGO group and 177 into the solid group. In the GGO group, the 2-year recurrence rates in curative and non-curative groups were 2.1 and 7.7%, respectively (p = 0.054). In the solid group, the 2-year recurrence rates in curative and non-curative groups were 0.0 and 28.6%, respectively (p = 0.03). Predictors of 2-year TTR after non-curative sublobar resection were pathological nodal metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 6.63; p = 0.02) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI; HR, 3.28; p = 0.03) in the GGO group, and LVI (HR, 4.37; p < 0.001) and fibrosis (HR, 3.18; p = 0.006) in the solid group. The current patient selection criteria for sublobar resection are satisfactory. LVI was a predictor for recurrence after non-curative resection. This result supports selection criteria of patients for sublobar resection. LVI may help predict recurrence after non-curative sublobar resection.

Pulmonary function changes after sublobar resection in patients with peripheral non-subpleural nodules

BackgroundIn the treatment of peripheral early-staged lung cancer and benign lesions, segmentectomy and wedge resection are both reliable treatment methods. It is debatable that how much pulmonary function will be lost after different sublobar resection in the treatment of early-staged deep-located peripheral NSCLC (non-small cell lung cancer). The purpose of this study was to explore postoperative pulmonary function changes of sublobar resection in enrolled patients with non-subpleural peripheral nodules.MethodsWe collected clinical data of patients undergoing VATS (video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery) segmentectomy or wedge resection for single nodule. These nodules were confirmed as peripheral non-subpleural nodules by preoperative 3D imaging. Patients were divided into two groups according to the operation procedure. Demographic characteristics, pulmonary function, postoperative outcomes, and others were collected. All data was gathered at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. Outcomes after wedge resection were compared with those after segmentectomy resection.ResultsA total of 88 patients were included in this study, including 46 patients with VATS wedge resection and 42 patients with VATS segmentectomy. No difference was detected when comparing FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 s) loss between these two groups (17.6 ± 2.1%, wedge resection vs. 19.4 ± 5.4%, segmentectomy, P = 0.176). FVC (forced vital capacity) loss (8.7 ± 2.3%, wedge resection vs. 17.1 ± 2.2%, segmentectomy, P < 0.001) and MVV (maximum ventilatory volume) loss (11.5 ± 3.1%, wedge resection vs. 20.6 ± 7.8%, segmentectomy, P < 0.001) in segmentectomy group was significantly higher than those in wedge resection group. Discrepancies were investigated when comparing duration of surgery (70 ± 22 min, wedge resection vs. 111 ± 52 min, segmentectomy, P = 0.0002), postoperative drainage (85 ± 45 mL, wedge resection vs. 287 ± 672 mL, segmentectomy, P = 0.0123), and treatment hospitalization expenses [35148 ± 889CNY, wedge resection vs. 52,502 (38,276–57,772) CNY, segmentectomy, P < 0.0002]. No significant difference was found between air leak time (1.7 ± 0.7 days, wedge resection vs. 2.5 ± 1.7 days, segmentectomy, P = 0.062) and hospitalization time (2.7 ± 0.7 days, wedge resection vs. 3.5 ± 1.7 days, segmentectomy, P = 0.051).ConclusionsFor patients with peripheral non-subpleural nodules, we observed that patients who underwent wedge resection had less lung function loss than those who underwent segmentectomy when their lung function was reviewed at the 6th month after surgery. Patients undergoing wedge resection had partial advantages over patients with segmental resection in terms of hospitalization cost, operation time and postoperative drainage, etc. Wedge resection, as a treatment for peripheral non-subpleural pulmonary nodules, seemed to have more advantages in preserving patients’ pulmonary function.

EP02.03-001 The Role of Completion Lobectomy Following Sublobar Resection in Patients with T1 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Although lobar resection is the standard approach for surgical resection, it has been shown that sublobar resections can also be performed in select patients. In our study, we aimed to analyze the survival of the patients with T1N0-1-2M0 who underwent completion lobectomy following sublobar resection.

Lobe-Specific Analysis of Sublobar Lung Resection for NSCLC Patients with Tumors ≤ 2 cm.

Simple SummaryWith the increase of the use of sublobar resection, the optimal strategy for early-stage NSCLC patients is essential. Previous studies showed tumors in different lobes are associated with different prognoses after radiotherapy and immunotherapy, inspiring us that each lobes had a different prognosis. Thus, we investigated the best surgical procedure for sublobar resection in patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm based on a lobe-specific analysis using propensity score matching. The results of this study will make it easier for surgeons to screen out patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm for segmentectomy or wedge resection, although this must be validated in larger cohorts.(1) Background: Sublobar resection can be used as an alternative surgical strategy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, the choice between wedge resection and segmentectomy remains contentious. In this study, we investigated the optimal surgical procedure for sublobar resection in patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm with a lobe-specific analysis; (2) Methods: Data for patients with T1N0M0 with a diameter of ≤2 cm who had undergone sublobar resection were retrieved. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the inherent bias, and the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank tests were used to assess the differences in survival; (3) Results: A total of 1882 patients were identified after the PSM. Patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm who had undergone segmentectomy showed better survival than those who had undergone wedge resection. However, when NSCLC was ≤1 cm, there was no significant difference in OS between the two groups. This demonstrated an OS advantage of segmentectomy over wedge resection for patients with NSCLC tumors of 1–2 cm (p = 0.024). Further analysis indicated that this survival benefit was only observed in patients with right upper NSCLC of 1–2 cm, but not with NSCLC in the other four lobes; (4) Conclusions: Segmentectomy showed a greater survival benefit than wedge resection only in patients with NSCLC of 1–2 cm, particularly those with primary tumors in the right upper lobe. Therefore, we propose a lobe-specific sublobar resection strategy for early-stage NSCLC patients (tumors of 1–2 cm) who cannot tolerate lobectomy.

Clinical Significance of Regional Lymph Node Evaluation During Sublobar Resection in Lung Cancer

BackgroundThis study evaluated the prognostic effect of regional lymph node evaluation (LNE) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent sublobar resection based on harvested node stations. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with NSCLC who underwent sublobar resection at Asan Medical Center between 2007 and 2016. To adjust for the differences in confounding variables between the groups, propensity score–based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed. ResultsIn the LNE group with pathological N0 disease (n = 522), 458 (87.7%) patients underwent both N1 and N2 LNE (N1 + N2 group) and 64 (12.3%) underwent only N2 LNE (N2 alone group). The N1 + N2 group had better prognosis before (P < .001) and after (P = .019) IPTW adjustment. Similar results were obtained even in patients with tumor size less than or equal to 2 cm (P = .032) or who underwent wedge resection (P = .041). According to IPTW-adjusted multivariable analysis, the performance of regional LNE was a significant prognostic factor for survival outcome (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74; P = .002). ConclusionsLNE is a critical process during sublobar resection in patients with NSCLC. Regional LNE during sublobar resection can significantly affect clinical outcomes even in patients with wedge resection or with tumor size less than 2 cm.

Optimal margins for early stage peripheral lung adenocarcinoma resection

BackgroundA pathologically confirmed negative margin is required when performing sublobar resection in patients with early stage peripheral lung adenocarcinoma. However, the optimal margin distance to ensure complete tumor resection while preserving healthy lung tissue remains unknown. We aimed to establish a reliable distance range for negative margins.MethodsA total of 52 intraoperative para-cancer tissue specimens from patients with peripheral lung adenocarcinoma with pathological tumors ≤2 cm in size were examined. Depending on the distance from the tumor edge (D), the para-cancer tissues were divided into the following five groups: D < 0.5 cm (group I); 0.5 cm ≤ D < 1.0 cm (group II); 1.0 cm ≤ D < 1.5 cm (group III); 1.5 cm ≤ D < 2.0 cm (group IV); and D ≥ 2.0 cm (group V). During pathological examination of the specimens under a microscope, the presence of atypical adenomatous hyperplasia or more severe lesions was considered unsafe, whereas the presence of normal lung tissue or benign hyperplasia was considered safe.ResultsGroup V, in which the margin was the farthest from the tumor edge, was the safest. There were significant safety differences in between groups I and V (χ2 = 26.217, P < 0.001). Significant safety differences also existed between groups II and V (χ2 = 9.420, P < 0.005). There were no significant safety differences between group III or IV and group V (P = 0.207; P = 0.610).ConclusionsWe suggest that when performing sublobar resection in patients with early stage peripheral lung adenocarcinoma with pathological tumor sizes ≤2 cm, the resection margin distance should be ≥1 cm to ensure a negative margin.

Comparison of Lobectomy and Sublobar Resection for Stage IA Elderly NSCLC Patients (≥70 Years): A Population-Based Propensity Score Matching's Study.

BackgroundTo investigate the differences in survival between lobectomy and sub-lobar resection for elderly stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry.MethodThe data of stage IA elderly NSCLC patients (≥ 70 years) with tumors less than or equal to 3 cm in diameter were extracted. Propensity-matched analysis was used. Lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) was compared among the patients after lobectomy and sub-lobar resection. The proportional hazards model was applied to identify multiple prognostic factors.ResultsA total of 3,504 patients met criteria after propensity score matching (PSM). Although the LCSS was better for lobectomy than for sub-lobar resection in patients with tumors ≤ 3 cm before PSM (p < 0.001), no significant difference in the LCSS was identified between the two treatment groups after PSM (p = 0.191). Multivariate Cox regression showed the elder age, male gender, squamous cell carcinoma (SQC) histology type, poor/undifferentiated grade and a large tumor size were associated with poor LCSS. The subgroup analysis of tumor sizes, histologic types and lymph nodes (LNs) dissection, there were also no significant difference for LCSS between lobectomy and sub-lobar resection. The sub-lobar resection was further divided into segmentectomy or wedge resection, and it demonstrated that no significant differences in LCSS were identified among the treatment subgroups either. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that the elder age, poor/undifferentiated grade and a large tumor size were a statistically significant independent factor associated with survival.ConclusionIn terms of LCSS, lobectomy has no significant advantage over sub-lobar resection in elderly patients with stage IA NSCLC if lymph node assessment is performed adequately. The present data may contribute to develop a more suitable surgical treatment strategy for the stage IA elderly NSCLC patients.

Tumor Size, Histology, and Survival After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy and Sublobar Resection in Node-negative Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

Although SABR is increasingly emerging as an alternative to surgery for node-negative non-small cell lung cancer, there is poor understanding of patients who may most benefit SABR compared to surgery. This study examined the relationship between tumor size and the comparative outcomes of SABR and sublobar resection in patients with node-negative non-small cell lung cancer. A total of 59,949 patients met study criteria: 19,888 (33%) underwent SABR, 33,052 (55%) wedge resection, and 7009 (12%) segmental resection. In multivariable regression, a significant 3-way interaction was found between histology, tumor size, and type of treatment. After stratification by histology, a significant interaction between tumor size and treatment was preserved for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. Sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for tumor sizes greater than 6 and 8 mm for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, respectively. SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection for patients with papillary and large cell histology. In this National Cancer Database analysis, sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for lesions >6or 8 mm in patients with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma; however, SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection in patients with aggressive tumors including papillary and large cell histology. Histologic diagnosis in patients with even small tumors may enable better treatment selection in those who cannot tolerate lobectomy.

The prognosis of small-sized non-small cell lung cancer with visceral pleural invasion after sublobar resection.

BackgroundSublobar resection is sometimes performed as a surgical treatment for small peripheral tumors. However, there is a question about whether sublobar resection is adequate treatment when visceral pleural invasion is diagnosed postoperatively. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognosis of patients with small-sized stage IB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after sublobar resection.MethodsFrom January 2010 to December 2018, 227 consecutive patients with eighth edition TNM stage IB NSCLC (per the joint staging system of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer and the American Joint Committee on Cancer) underwent curative surgery at a single center. Those patients were reviewed retrospectively. The clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis were compared between the sublobar resection group and the lobectomy group. The sublobar resection group included only small-sized (invasive component size ≤2 cm) NSCLC.ResultsIn all study patients, clinicopathological characteristics between the sublobar resection and lobectomy groups were not different except in maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and invasive component size. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate was 80.7% after sublobar resection and 73.4% after lobectomy (P=0.349). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 87.3% after sublobar resection and 84.8% after lobectomy (P=0.503). In patients with small-sized NSCLC, the clinicopathological characteristics were not different between the sublobar resection group and the lobectomy group. The 5-year RFS rate was 80.7% after sublobar resection and 72.3% after lobectomy (P=0.417). The 5-year OS rate was 87.3% after sublobar resection and 91.2% after lobectomy (P=0.956). Sublobar resection was not a risk factor for recurrence in the multivariate analysis.ConclusionsThe prognosis of sublobar resection in patients with small-sized stage IB NSCLC was comparable with lobectomy. Thus, additional completion lobectomy may not be essential in this setting, despite postoperative upstaging from T1 to T2a.

Long-Term Outcomes After Sublobar Resection Versus Lobectomy in Patients With Clinical Stage IA Lung Adenocarcinoma Meeting the Node-Negative Criteria Defined by High-Resolution Computed Tomography and [18F]-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-d-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography

PurposeTo evaluate long-term outcomes after sublobar resection for patients with clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma who met our proposed node-negative (N0) criteria, namely solid component size < 0.8 cm on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) or a maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of < 1.5 on [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). Patients and MethodsBetween April 2006 and December 2010, a total of 347 patients with clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma underwent complete resection in two medical centers. Long-term outcomes of patients with disease that met the N0 criteria after sublobar resection were evaluated. ResultsThe disease of 201 patients (57.9%) met the N0 criteria. Meeting N0 criteria was significantly associated with low-grade adenocarcinoma subtype (P < .001) and absence of lymphatic invasion (P < .001), vascular invasion (P < .001), and pleural invasion (P < .001). One patient (0.5%) had lymph node metastasis. The median follow-up period was 86.1 months. There was a significant difference in the overall survival (OS) rates between patients with disease that met the N0 criteria (5-year OS, 93.9%; 10-year OS, 90.3%) and disease that did not (5-year OS, 81.5%; 10-year OS, 64.3%; P < .001). Among patients with disease that met the N0 criteria, there was no significant difference in the OS between those who underwent lobectomy (5-year OS, 94.3%; 10-year OS, 92.6%) and those who underwent sublobar resection (5-year OS, 93.8%; 10-year OS, 89.3%; P = .64). ConclusionsSublobar resection of clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma is feasible in selected patients with disease that meets the N0 criteria, with excellent long-term survival.

Lobectomy versus sublobar resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

Surgery is the gold standard treatment of lung cancer. The minimally invasive technique does not only concern access to the chest but also the limits of parenchymal resection. The study debates on the safety and oncological adequacy of sublobar resections in bronchogenic carcinoma patients. A systematic analysis of the data in the literature was carried out, comparing the outcomes of patients with resectable non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. These last interventions include both segmentectomies and wedge resections taking into consideration the following parameters: complications, relapse rate and overall survival. The complication rate is higher in patients underwent lobectomy compared to sublobar resection, especially in presence of high comorbidity index or octogenarian patients (overall values respectively between 0 and 48% and 0 and 46.6%). Contrarily, the relapse rate (6.2% to 32% vs. 3.6% to 53.4%) and overall survival (50.2% to 93.8% vs. 38.6% to 100%) are more favorable in patients undergoing lobectomy. Sublobar resections are particularly indicated in elderly patients and in patients with high comorbidity index or reduced respiratory functional reserve. However, pulmonary lobectomy still remains the safest and oncologically correct method in patients with good performance status or higher risk of recurrence.

Survival Outcomes of Treatment with Radiofrequency Ablation, Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, or Sublobar Resection for Patients with Clinical Stage I Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Single-Center Evaluation

PurposeTo retrospectively compare the outcomes of radiofrequency (RF) ablation, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and sublobar resection (SLR) in patients with stage I non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at a single center. Materials and MethodsOverall, 289 patients (38 RF ablation, 58 SBRT, and 193 SLR) were included. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated, multiple propensity score was estimated using a multinomial logistic regression model, and relationships between treatments and outcomes were assessed using a Cox proportional hazard model. Hazard ratios (HRs) for death from any cause and disease progression or death from any cause were examined by a crude model, an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) model, and an IPTW model adjusted for missing variables. ResultsThe 5-year overall and progression-free survival rates were 58.9% and 39.9%, respectively, for RF ablation; 42.0% and 34.9%, respectively, for SBRT; and 85.5% and 75.9%, respectively, for SLR. Significantly longer survival time and lower HR were observed for SLR than other treatments. However, after statistical adjustment, these relationships were not significant except for reduced HR of disease progression or death from any cause of SLR compared to RF ablation in the IPTW model. The median hospital stays for RF ablation, SBRT, and SLR were 6.5, 6, and 16 days, respectively. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred only in 11 SLR cases. ConclusionsSLR achieved the longest survival. However, after statistical adjustment, there were no significant outcome differences among RF ablation, SBRT, and SLR, except for 1 model. RF ablation or SBRT may be alternative treatments for selected patients with early-stage NSCLC.

Comparison of survival outcomes between sublobar resection and lobectomies in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma by propensity score matching analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of sublobar resections and compare these with those of lobectomies in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma patients. We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 871 patients who underwent lobectomies or sublobar resections for early-stage lung adenocarcinomas. Two hundred thirty-five (27.0%) patients underwent sublobar resections (wedge and segmentectomies), and 636 (73.0%) underwent lobectomies. Propensity score matching resulted in 2 groups each with 219 patients. Survival analysis was performed. Mean age of matched patients was 61.9 (± 10.38, range of 21 to 91) years, mean follow-up period was 50.8 (± 27.57, range of 6.1 to 128.9) months, and mean tumor size was 15.2 (± 6.49, range of 3.0 to 45.0) mm. Overall recurrence rate was 9.4% (41 patients), and it was 8.7% (19 patients) in sublobar resection patients and 9.6% (21 patients) in lobectomy patients. Rates and sites of recurrence were not significantly different between the two surgical groups (p = 0.500 and 0.401, respectively). Overall 5-year survival and recurrence-free survival of sublobar resection patients were 90.6 and 89.5%, respectively, whereas those of lobectomy patients were 91.9 and 88.3%, respectively. No significant differences in overall 5-year survival rate or recurrence-free survival rate were found between the two groups (p = 0.636 and p = 0.975, respectively). Prognosis of early-stage lung adenocarcinoma treated with sublobar resection was not inferior to that treated with lobectomy in carefully selected cases. Further investigations, including randomized controlled trials, are needed to identify the equivalent oncologic efficacy of sublobar resections.

The Effect of Resection Margin Distance and Invasive Component Size on Recurrence After Sublobar Resection in Patients With Small (≤2 Cm) Lung Adenocarcinoma.

When performing sublobar resection for lung cancer, the margin distance should exceed the tumor size. However, instead of total tumor size, the 8th edition TNM staging system has adopted the size of invasive component for the T stage. The aim of this study was to determine whether the prognosis was satisfactory when the resection margin distance was greater than the invasive component size instead of the total tumor size. From 2008 to 2017, 193 consecutive patients were diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma (invasive component size ≤2cm) and underwent sublobar resection. We analyzed risk factors for recurrence using clinicopathological factors including margin/invasive component ratio (resection margin distance/invasive component size). Mean tumor size was 1.4 (±0.5) cm and the mean invasive component size was 0.8cm (±0.5). In the multivariate analysis, neither resection margin distance (cm) nor margin/tumor ratio (resection margin distance/tumor size) was significant risk factors for recurrence. On the other hand, the margin/invasive component ratio (hazard ratio =0.035, p = 0.043) and the SUVmax (hazard ratio =1.993, p = 0.033) were significant risk factors for recurrence. When sublobar resection is performed for small (invasive component size ≤2cm) adenocarcinomas of the lung, the resection margin distance should be larger than the invasive component size. Sublobar resection is not an appropriate treatment for lung adenocarcinoma with high SUVmax.

Segmentectomy Versus Wedge Resection for Stage I Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis

BackgroundSegmentectomy and wedge resection have been recommended as appropriate surgical treatments for patients with poor pulmonary function or major comorbidities. However, for stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), it is still undecided whether survival is better with segmentectomy or with wedge resection. MethodsA meta-analysis was performed of studies examining survival outcomes after sublobar resection in patients with stage I NSCLC. Three electronic databases were searched to identify studies that investigated overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and disease-free survival between patients receiving segmentectomy versus wedge resection. A total of 19 relevant studies published before 31 April 2018 that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included in this meta-analysis. ResultsThe 19 studies involved a total of 14,197 patients with stage I NSCLC. Overall survival was significantly better after segmentectomy than after wedge resection (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.88; P < 0.00001). This was also true of cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64-0.79; P < 0.00001) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.54-0.98; P = 0.04). A fixed-model was applied for the analysis as there was no significant heterogeneity between the studies. ConclusionsSurvival after lobar resection for stage I NSCLC is significantly better with segmentectomy than with wedge resection.

Lobectomy versus sub-lobar resection in patients with stage IA right middle lobe non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity score matched analysis.

The aim of the present study was to compare the prognostic outcomes of patients with stage IA right middle lobe non-small cell lung cancers (RML NSCLCs) that underwent either lobectomy (LR) or sub-lobar resection (SLR) after 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Patients with stage IA RML NSCLC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2005 to 2015. Cox regression analysis was carried out to compare lung cancer specific survival (LCSS) following LR or SLR before and after PSM. Subgroup analysis of LCSS stratified by tumor size (≤1, 1-2, and 2-3 cm) was also performed. A total of 1,104 patients met the inclusion criteria. One hundred ninety-eight (17.9%) patients underwent SLR, and 906 (82.1%) underwent LR. There were significant differences between patients of LR and SLR groups with regard to the tumor size and the number of examined lymph nodes. After PSM, 147 matched pairs (n=294) were selected. Multivariable cox regression analysis revealed no difference in the LCSS of patients that underwent either LR or SLR before [hazard ratio (HR): 0.881, 95% CI: 0.547-1.422, P=0.605] and after PSM (HR: 0.778, 95% CI: 0.409-1.480, P=0.444). Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in LCSS between patients of LR and SLR groups with regard to the tumor size (all P>0.05). Similar to lymphadenectomy, the prognostic outcomes in patients with stage IA RML NSCLC were comparable between LR and SLR.

Prognosis analysis of lobectomy and sublobar resection in patients ≥75 years old with pathological stage I invasive lung adenocarcinoma of ≤3 cm: a propensity score matching-based analysis.

BackgroundTo determine the clinical prognosis after sublobectomy versus lobectomy in elderly patients ≥75 years old with stage I invasive lung adenocarcinoma ≤3 cm in size.MethodsIn patients ≥75 years old, 255 patients were diagnosed with stage I invasive lung adenocarcinoma ≤3 cm in size between 2010 and 2014 in Shanghai Chest Hospital, they were all treated with sublobectomy or lobectomy. Potential confounding factors that consisted in the baseline characteristics of these two groups was balanced by the method of propensity score matching (PSM). The stratified analysis was conducted to compare the relapse-free survival (RFS) and lung cancer special survival (LCSS) rates in the sublobectomy and lobectomy groups.ResultsAs for the 255 patients, 112 cases conducted sublobectomy and 143 with lobectomy. Significant difference existed in RFS before (P=0.002) and after (P=0.010) PSM. Similarly, we still recognized significant difference in LCSS between the two groups before (log-rank P<0.001) or after (log-rank P=0.002) PSM. We still identified different RFS or LCSS rates between the stratified tumor size group and the stratified lymph node dissection group after adjustment of PSM.ConclusionsLobectomy showed a survival advantage for sublobectomy for patient ≥75 years old with stage I lung adenocarcinoma ≤3 cm in size. Considering that lobectomy could get a better prognosis, it should be preferable for the treatment of patient ≥75 years old with stage I lung adenocarcinoma ≤3 cm in size.