A Multicenter Study of Complex Segmentectomy versus Wedge Resection in Clinical Stage 0-IA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Sublobar resection for small-sized non-small cell lung cancer: A comprehensive comparison between subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection

OBJECTIVES

Subsegmentectomy has been adopted for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for decades. This study aimed to compare the features between subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection for NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

NSCLC patients who underwent subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively screened. Demographic, radiomic, and perioperative characteristics between patients were compared. Further, log-rank test, univariate and multivariate Cox regression were used for prognostic evaluation.

RESULTS

There were 276, 670, and 494 patients undergoing subsegmentectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection, respectively. Patients with segmentectomy and subsegmentectomy had larger tumor sizes and greater distances to the pleura than those with wedge resection. Subsegmentectomy and segmentectomy were more likely to achieve adequate surgical margins than wedge resection (82.0 % vs. 79.5 % vs. 64.7 %, P < 0.001), which was especially true for nodules away from the pleura (80.2 % vs. 81.4 % vs. 55.8 %, P < 0.001). In addition, anatomic resection allowed for more lymph node dissection and required less preoperative localization than wedge reception. Subsegmentectomy preserved about two subsegments than segmentectomy (P < 0.001). The incidence of prolonged air leakage after subsegmentectomy (3.3 %) and wedge (1.8 %) was similar (P = 0.308). Notably, 66.8 % of patients who underwent segmentectomy or subsegmentectomy were considered unsuitable for wedge. During the follow-up (55.1 months), no tumor recurrence or death occurred in patients undergoing subsegmentectomy. No significant recurrence-free survival (P = 0.140) or overall survival (P = 0.370) difference existed between these groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Subsegmentectomy could achieve more adequate surgical margins than wedge resection and showed superiority for deep nodules. Compared to segmentectomy, subsegmentectomy could preserve more lung parenchyma.

Survival and pulmonary function in stage IA non-small cell lung cancer after sublobar resection versus lobectomy: An updated meta-analysis

Traditionally, lobectomy was standard for stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Recent RCTs suggest sublobar resection's comparable outcomes. Our meta-analysis, incorporating 30 studies (including four RCTs), assessed sublobar resection's efficacy. Employing a random-effects model and I2 statistics for heterogeneity, we found sublobar resection reduced DFS (HR 1.31, p < 0.01) and OS (HR 1.27, p < 0.01) overall. However, RCT subgroup analysis showed no significant differences in DFS (p = 0.28) or OS (p = 0.62). Sublobar resection is a viable option for well-selected patients.

Long term outcomes after lobar versus sublobar resection for patients with Non-Small cell lung Cancer: Systematic review and individual patient data Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Surgical resection remains the primary treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with lobectomy considered the standard approach. However, recent evidence suggests that sublobar resection may be an alternative option for select patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) cohort studies comparing lobectomy and sublobar resection in NSCLC patients were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), 30-day mortality, and cancer recurrence rates. Individual patient data (IPD) were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves, and one-stage and two-stage meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies involving 6,075 NSCLC patients (3,119 undergoing lobectomy, 2,956 undergoing sublobar resection) were included. Lobectomy was associated with significantly better OS compared to sublobar resection (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.89, p < 0.001). However, when sublobar resection was further divided into segmentectomy and wedge resection, no significant difference in OS was observed between lobectomy and segmentectomy (HR:0.92, 95 %CI: 0.75-1.14, p = 0.464) whereas lobar resection was associated with better OS compared to wedge resection (HR:0.52, 95 %CI: 0.41-0.67, p < 0.001). DFS outcomes were similar between lobectomy and sublobar resection (HR:0.98, 95 %CI: 0.84-1.14, p = 0.778).

CONCLUSION

Lobectomy is associated with better overall survival compared to sublobar resection in NSCLC patients. However, when sublobar resection is subdivided, segmentectomy shows comparable outcomes to lobectomy, while wedge resection is inferior. These findings support the consideration of segmentectomy as the surgical option of choice for Stage IA NSCLC patients.

Effectiveness and safety of segmentectomy vs. wedge resection for the treatment of patients with operable non‑small cell lung cancer: A meta‑analysis and systematic review

The present study compared the differences in effectiveness and safety between segmentectomy (ST) and wedge resection (WR) in patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched for papers published from inception until July 2023. The inclusion criteria were based on the population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and study designs. ROBINS-I was selected to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence in the included non-randomised studies. Appropriate effect sizes were selected, and subgroup analyses, heterogeneity tests, sensitivity analyses and publication bias were applied. A total of 18 retrospective studies were included, involving 19,381 patients with operable NSCLC. The 5-year overall survival rate [hazard ratio (HR), 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04, 0.34; P=0.014; I2=76.3%], lung cancer-specific survival rate (HR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.21, 0.38; P<0.01; I2=13.8%) and metastasis rate [odds ratio (OR), 1.56; 95% CI, 1.03, 2.38; P=0.037] in patients with operable NSCLC treated with WR were worse than those in patients treated with ST. The incidence of postoperative complications (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23, 0.82) in the WR group was lower than in the ST treatment group. There was no difference in postoperative recurrence (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 0.97, 4.74; P=0.058) and mortality (risk difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.03, 0.11; P=0.287) between groups. Based on current evidence, patients with NSCLC treated with ST surgery have better postoperative survival but more complications than those patients treated with WT, while the effect of WR and ST on the recurrence rate and distant metastasis rate remains controversial.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Versus Ablation Versus Surgery for Early-Stage Lung Cancer in High-Risk Patients

Current treatment for early-stage lung cancer focuses on surgical intervention as the mainstay of treatment; however, this poses issues in patients that are high-risk or unable to tolerate any operation. In this case, sublobar resection or radiation therapy has been the primary treatment for these subsets of patients. Alternative approaches include stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and thermal ablation. In this article, we focus on treatment strategies using SBRT, thermal ablation, or surgery as it pertains to high-risk patients with early-stage lung cancer.