Postoperative Short-term Outcomes Between Sublobar Resection and Lobectomy in Patients with Lung Adenocarcinoma
ABSTRACT: Background To investigate postoperative temporary consequences of the enrolled patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods We analyzed the clinical data of patients with lung adenocarcinoma admitted by the same surgical team of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from July 2019 to December 2019. Statistical methods including propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to analyze the differences among them. Results A total of 108 patients were enrolled, including 50 patients with sublobar resection and 58 patients with lobectomy. Before PSM, there were statistically significant differences in age (p=0.015), hospitalization costs (p=0.042), lymphadenectomy (p=0.000), pathological staging (p=0.000), number of lymph nodes removed (p=0.000), number of positive lymph nodes (p=0.034), chest drainage duration (p=0.000), total chest drainage (p=0.000), length of postoperative hospital stays (p=0.000), postoperative D-dimer level (p=0.030) and perioperative lymphocyte margin (LM) (p=0.003) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. After PSM, there were statistical differences in number of lymph nodes removed (p=0.000), chest drainage duration (p=0.031) and total chest drainage (p=0.002) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. Whether with PSM analysis or not, there were no significant differences in other blood test results, such as inflammation indicators, postoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), albumin level, perioperative activity of daily living (ADL) scale scoring margin, complications, postoperative admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and readmission within 30 days. NLR was associated with total chest drainage (p=0.000), length of postoperative hospital stays (p=0.000), postoperative D-dimer level (p=0.050) and ADL scale scoring margin (p=0.003) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. Conclusion Sublobar resection, including wedge resection and segmentectomy, was as safe and feasible as lobectomy in our study, and they shared similar short-term outcomes. Postoperative NLR could be used to detect the clinical outcomes of patients. Secondary resectability of pulmonary function (SRPF) should be the main purpose of sublobar resection.
Project description:BACKGROUND:To date, few studies have evaluated the impact of lobectomy versus sublobar resection for early small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We investigated the survival rates of patients with pathological stage T1-2N0M0 SCLC who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. METHODS:We identified 548 SCLC patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression analysis were used to adjust for baseline characteristics. RESULTS:The three-year overall survival (OS) of patients treated with lobectomy (n?=?376, 60%) was significantly higher than those treated with sublobar resection (n?=?172, 38%). PSM and Cox multivariable analysis further confirmed this result (hazard ratio [HR] 0.543, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.421-0.680; P?<?0.001). The three-year OS of patients treated with segmentectomy (n?=?24, 54%) and wedge resection (n?=?148, 36%) was not significantly different (HR 0.639, 95% CI 0.393-1.039; P?=?0.071). Based on PSM analysis, segmentectomy conferred a superior survival advantage to patients relative to wedge resection (HR 0.466, 95% CI 0.221-0.979; P?=?0.040). CONCLUSION:Lobectomy correlated with superior survival. For patients in which lobectomy is unsuitable, prognosis following segmentectomy appears to be better than after wedge resection.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Spread through air spaces (STAS) is a form of invasion wherein tumor cells extend beyond the tumor edge within the lung parenchyma. In lung adenocarcinoma (ADC), we investigated the (1) association between STAS and procedure-specific outcomes (sublobar resection and lobectomy), (2) effect of surgical margin-to-tumor diameter ratio in STAS-positive patients, and (3) potential utility of frozen sections (FSs) for detecting STAS intraoperatively. METHODS:We investigated 1497 patients who underwent lobectomy (n = 970) or sublobar resection (n = 527) for T1N0M0 lung ADC after propensity score matching. Outcomes were analyzed by using a competing risks approach. The effect of margin-to-tumor ratio on recurrence pattern (locoregional and distant) was investigated in patients who underwent sublobar resection. Five pathologists evaluated the feasibility of intraoperatively identifying STAS by using FSs (sensitivity, specificity, and interrater reliability). RESULTS:On multivariable analysis after propensity score matching (349 pairs/procedure), sublobar resection was significantly associated with recurrence (subhazard ratio = 2.84 [p < 0.001]) and lung cancer-specific death (subhazard ratio = 2.63 [p = 0.021]) in patients with STAS but not in those without STAS. Patients with STAS who underwent sublobar resection had a higher risk of locoregional recurrence regardless of margin-to-tumor ratio (for a margin-to-tumor ratio of ?1 versus <1, the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence rates were 16% and 25%, respectively); among patients without STAS, locoregional recurrences occurred in patients with margin-to-tumor ratio lower than 1 (a 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence rate of 7%). The sensitivity and specificity for detecting STAS by use of FSs were 71% and 92%, with substantial interrater reliability (Gwet's AC1, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with T1 lung ADC with STAS, lobectomy was associated with better outcomes than sublobar resection was. Pathologists can recognize STAS on FSs.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Lobectomy has been compared with sublobar resection for the treatment of stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Accurate long-term data are lacking on the risk of recurrence in routine clinical practice. This study used a unique and representative dataset to compare recurrence, overall survival (OS), and lymph node staging between lobectomy and sublobar resection. METHODS:The American College of Surgeons performed a Special Study of the National Cancer Data Base, by reabstracting records to augment NSCLC data with enhanced information on preoperative comorbidity and cancer recurrence from 2007 to 2012. For patients treated with lobectomy or sublobar resection (wedge resection or segmentectomy) for clinical stage IA NSCLC, propensity matching and competing risks models compared 5-year OS and risk of cancer recurrence. Secondary measures included lymph nodes collected, pathologic upstaging, and surgical margin status. RESULTS:A total of 1,687 patients with stage IA NSCLC were identified (1,354 who underwent lobectomy, and 333 who had sublobar resections). Propensity matching yielded 325 pairs. Lobectomy and sublobar resection groups had similar 5-year OS (61.8% vs 55.6%, p = 0.561). The sublobar group had a 39% increased risk of NSCLC recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 1.87). Median lymph node counts were higher for lobectomy-treated patients (7 [3, 10] vs 1 [0, 4], p < 0.001)]. CONCLUSIONS:In an enhanced national dataset representative of outcomes for stage IA NSCLC, sublobar resection was associated with a 39% increased risk of cancer recurrence. The majority of patients treated with sublobar resection had an inadequate lymph node assessment. These real-world results must be considered when existing clinical trial results comparing these treatments are extrapolated for clinical use.
Project description: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.
Project description:BACKGROUND:In early-stage lung adenocarcinomas, spread through air spaces (STAS) are reported to be a prognostic factor in patients who have undergone sublobar resection, but not lobectomy. In contrast, reports have also shown that STAS is significantly associated with poor survival outcomes after lobectomy, but not after limited resection. Thus, the prognostic impact of STAS differs according to published reports. METHODS:A total of 82 patients with early-stage adenocarcinomas who underwent limited resection and whose STAS status could be examined were enrolled in this retrospective study. We evaluated the association between STAS and clinicopathological characteristics and postoperative survival. RESULTS:Among 82 patients, 31 (37.8%) were positive for STAS, while 51 (62.2%) were negative. STAS was significantly associated with advanced tumor stage (P < 0.01), lower histological differentiation (P = 0.01), and the presence of pleural invasion (P = 0.01). Patients with STAS had significantly shorter recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) than those without STAS (P < 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively). According to multivariate analysis, positivity for STAS was an independent prognostic parameter for RFS (P < 0.01), but not OS (P = 0.45). Three patients who developed surgical margin recurrence and one patient who developed distant recurrence were all positive for STAS. CONCLUSIONS:STAS was predictive of poor postoperative survival in patients with early-stage adenocarcinomas treated with limited resection and was associated with surgical margin recurrence.
Project description:Recent data have suggested possible oncologic equivalence of sublobar resection with lobectomy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our aim was to evaluate and compare short-term and long-term survival for these surgical approaches.This retrospective cohort study utilized the National Cancer Data Base. Patients undergoing lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection for preoperative clinical T1A N0 NSCLC from 2003 to 2011 were identified. Overall survival (OS) and 30-day mortality were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, logistic regression models, and propensity score matching. Further analysis of survival stratified by tumor size, facility type, number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined, and surgical margins was performed.A total of 13,606 patients were identified. After propensity score matching, 987 patients remained in each group. Both segmentectomy and wedge resection were associated with significantly worse OS when compared with lobectomy (hazard ratio: 1.70 and 1.45, respectively, both p < 0.001), with no difference in 30-day mortality. Median OS for lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection were 100, 74, and 68 months, respectively (p < 0.001). Finally, sublobar resection was associated with increased likelihood of positive surgical margins, lower likelihood of having more than three LNs examined, and significantly lower rates of nodal upstaging.In this large national-level, clinically diverse sample of clinical T1A NSCLC patients, wedge and segmental resections were shown to have significantly worse OS compared with lobectomy. Further patients undergoing sublobar resection were more likely to have inadequate lymphadenectomy and positive margins. Ongoing prospective study taking into account LN upstaging and margin status is still needed.
Project description:Stereotactic ablative radiation (SABR) is a promising alternative to lobectomy or sublobar resection for early lung cancer, but the value of SABR in comparison to surgical therapy remains debated. We examined the cost-effectiveness of SABR relative to surgery using SEER-Medicare data.Patients age ?66 years with localized (<5 cm) non-small cell lung cancers diagnosed from 2003-2009 were selected. Propensity score matching generated cohorts comparing SABR with either sublobar resection or lobectomy. Costs were determined via claims. Median survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) were constructed from joint distribution of incremental costs and effects estimated by non-parametric bootstrap.In comparing SABR to sublobar resection, 5-year total costs were $55,120 with SABR vs. $77,964 with sublobar resection (P<0.001) and median survival was 3.6 years with SABR vs. 4.1 years with sublobar resection (P=0.95). The ICER for sublobar resection compared to SABR was $45,683/life-year gained, yielding a 46% probability that sublobar resection is cost-effective. In comparing SABR to lobectomy, 5-year total costs were $54,968 with SABR vs. $82,641 with lobectomy (P<0.001) and median survival was 3.8 years with SABR vs. 4.7 years with lobectomy (P=0.81). The ICER for lobectomy compared to SABR was $28,645/life-year gained, yielding a 78% probability that lobectomy is cost-effective.SABR is less costly than surgery. While lobectomy may be cost-effective compared to SABR, sublobar resection is less likely to be cost-effective. Assessment of the relative value of SABR versus surgical therapy requires further research.
Project description:Introduction:The management of chest tubes and the volume threshold for chest tube removal after pulmonary resection remain controversial. Several studies have reported the volume threshold for chest tube removal following pulmonary resection to range from 200 to 450 mL/24 h. Methods:A prospective randomized single-blind clinical study was performed with data collected from patients who had undergone lobectomy and lymph node dissection at our hospital between June 2014 and April 2018. The patients were randomly assigned to the High group (removal of chest tube when drainage was <450 mL/24 h) or Low group (removal of chest tube when drainage was <200 mL/24 h) at postoperative day (POD) 2. The primary end point was drainage time. The secondary end point were complications and rate of thoracentesis. Results:Seventy patients met the inclusion criteria and were randomized, with 35 patients assigned to the High group and 35 patients to the Low group. The average duration of chest tube placement was 2.05 days in the High group and 2.31 days in the Low group. The duration of chest tube placement in the High group was significantly shorter than that in the Low group (p = 0.02). There were no major postoperative complications in either group. Thoracentesis was not necessary in either group. Conclusion:Pleural effusion of 450 mL/day is tolerable as the volume threshold for the removal of a chest tube after pulmonary resection.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Prolonged air leak and high-volume pleural drainage are the most common causes for delays in chest tube removal following lung resection. While digital pleural drainage systems have been successfully used in the management of post-operative air leak, their effect on pleural drainage and inflammation has not been studied before. We hypothesized that digital drainage systems (as compared to traditional analog continuous suction), using intermittent balanced suction, are associated with decreased pleural inflammation and postoperative drainage volumes, thus leading to earlier chest tube removal. METHODS:One hundred and three  patients were enrolled and randomized to either analog (n=50) or digital (n=53) drainage systems following oncologic lung resection. Chest tubes were removed according to standardized, pre-defined protocol. Inflammatory mediators [interleukin-1B (IL-1B), 6, 8, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-?)] in pleural fluid and serum were measured and analysed. The primary outcome of interest was the difference in total volume of postoperative fluid drainage. Secondary outcome measures included duration of chest tube in-situ, prolonged air-leak incidence, length of hospital stay and the correlation between pleural effusion formation, degree of inflammation and type of drainage system used. RESULTS:There was no significant difference in total amount of fluid drained or length of hospital stay between the two groups. A trend for shorter chest tube duration was found with the digital system when compared to the analog (P=0.055). Comparison of inflammatory mediator levels revealed no significant differences between digital and analog drainage systems. The incidence of prolonged post-operative air leak was significantly higher when using the analog system (9 versus 2 patients; P=0.025). Lobectomy was associated with longer chest tube duration (P=0.001) and increased fluid drainage when compared to sub-lobar resection (P<0.001), regardless of drainage system. CONCLUSIONS:Use of post-lung resection digital drainage does not appear to decrease pleural fluid formation, but is associated with decreased prolonged air leaks. Total pleural effusion volumes did not differ with the type of drainage system used. These findings support previously established benefits of the digital system in decreasing prolonged air leaks, but the advantages do not appear to extend to decreased pleural fluid formation.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Lung cancer in the right middle lobe has a poorer prognosis than tumors located in other lobes. The optimal surgical procedure for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the right middle lobe has not yet been elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare survival rates after lobectomy and sublobar resection for early-stage right middle lobe NSCLC.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection for stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC tumors ? 2 cm between 2004 and 2014 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database of 18 registries. Cox regression model analysis was used to evaluate the prognostic factors. The lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) and overall survival (OS) rates between the two groups were compared.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 861 patients met our criteria, including 662 (76.9%) patients who underwent lobectomy and 199 (23.1%) patients who underwent sublobar resection. No statistical differences in LCSS and OS rates were identified between the groups of patients with stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC ? 1 cm. For tumors > 1-2 cm, lobectomy was associated with more favorable LCSS and OS rates compared to sublobar resection.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Lobectomy and sublobar resection deliver a comparable prognosis for patients with stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC ? 1 cm. For tumors > 1-2 cm, lobectomy showed better survival rates than sublobar resection.