Is segmentectomy the future?

Segmentectomy versus lobectomy. Which factors are decisive for an optimal oncological outcome?

Low-dose computed tomography is being used for lung cancer screening in high-risk groups. Detecting lung cancer at an early stage improves the chance of optimal treatment and increases overall survival. This article compares segmentectomy vs. lobectomy as surgical options, in the case of stage I non-small cell lung carcinoma, ideally IA. To compare the 2 previously referred strategies, data were collected from articles (40 studies were reviewed), reviews, and systematic analyses in PubMed Central, as well as reviewing recent literature. Segmentectomy could be an equal alternative to lobectomy in early-stage NSCLC (tumour < 2 cm). It could be preferred for patients with a low cardiopulmonary reserve, who struggle to survive a lobectomy. As far as early-stage NSCLC is concerned, anatomic segmentectomy is an acceptable procedure in a selective group of patients. For better tumour and stage classification, a systematic lymph node dissection should be performed.

Robotic segmentectomy for early-stage lung cancer

Lobectomies have long been the gold standard for surgical treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with segmentectomies limited to instances of benign disease or as an alternative in patients where lung preservation is indicated. However, a recently published randomized control trial has demonstrated the superiority of segmentectomy over lobectomy in terms of overall survival for early-stage lung cancer. Segmentectomy could thus be considered a standard procedure for small-sized peripheral NSCLC. While segmentectomy via video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is the most widespread approach, development in video instrumentation and thoracic robotic surgery is rapidly gaining interest. Indeed, robotic surgery pioneers boast the advantages in three-dimensional view, improved magnification, ergonomics, dexterity, safety, and ease of surgery with this technology. This review aims to outline robotic-assisted segmentectomy indications, preoperative evaluation, and the operative conduct for the different lung segments from a single surgeon console. There are many ways to perform segmentectomies and therefore this review describes generalized approaches that can be tailored based on experience.

Lobectomy versus segmentectomy in patients with stage T (> 2 cm and ≤ 3 cm) N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity score matching study

Background

The safety and effectiveness of lung segmentectomy in patients with early non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. We have therefore reviewed the clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes of patients treated with lobectomy or segmentectomy for early T (> 2 and ≤ 3 cm) N0M0 NSCLC.

Methods

We obtained data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for patients who underwent lobectomy or segmentectomy between 2004 and 2015. To reduce bias and imbalances between the treatment groups, propensity score matching analysis was performed. We used Kaplan–Meier curves to estimate overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS). We conducted univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to identify independent prognostic factors for OS and cancer-specific survival, and applied the Cox proportional hazards model to create forest plots.

Results

Before matching, both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that patients who underwent lobectomy exhibited better OS (P < 0.001) and LCSS (P = 0.001) than patients who underwent segmentectomy. However, after matching, survival differences between the groups were not significant; OS (P = 0.434) and LCSS (P = 0.593). Regression analyses revealed that age and tumor grade were independent predictors of OS and LCSS (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with stage T (> 2 and ≤ 3 cm) N0M0 NSCLC undergoing segmentectomy can obtain OS and LCSS similar to those obtained with lobectomy. Further studies are required considering the solid component effects and pathologic tumor types regarding segmentectomies. Additional long-term survival and outcome analyses should be conducted with larger cohorts.

Evolution of the surgical treatment of lung cancer at a tertiary referral center in Brazil, 2011-2018

Objective:

To evaluate the evolution of clinical and epidemiological data, as well as data related to diagnosis, staging, treatment, and survival, among patients undergoing curative surgery for lung cancer at a tertiary referral center in the city of São Paulo, Brazil.

Methods:

This was a retrospective study of cases in the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer database. We selected only cases of patients undergoing curative surgery between January of 2011 and April of 2018. We determined overall and disease-free survival at 36 months and compared the data between two periods (2011-2014 and 2015-2018).

Results:

Comparing the two periods (N = 437 cases), we observed trends toward increases in the number of female patients, as well as in the proportions of former smokers (44.09% vs. 53.59%), of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma (52.21% vs. 59.72%), and of patients diagnosed at an earlier pathological stage, together with a decrease in 30-day mortality (4.05% vs. 2.39%). There were significant increases in the proportions of cases diagnosed at an earlier clinical stage (p = 0.002) or incidentally (p = 0.003). Although lobectomy was the main surgical technique employed, there was a proportional increase in segmentectomies (2.67% vs. 7.11%; p = 0.026). Overall and disease-free survival rates were 79.4% (95% CI: 74.0-83.9%) and 75.1% (95% CI: 69.1-80.1%), respectively. The difference in overall survival between the periods lost statistical significance when adjusted for pathological stage, the only factor that affected survival (log-rank: p = 0.038 to p = 0.079).

Conclusions:

The clinical and epidemiological evolution presented in this study corroborates global trends. The decrease in 30-day mortality was probably due to better patient selection and improved surgical techniques.

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.

Consistency of radiologists in identifying pulmonary nodules based on low-dose computed tomography

Background

To study the consistency of radiologists in identifying pulmonary nodules based on low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), and to analyze factors that affect the consistency.

Methods

A total of 750 LDCT cases were collected randomly from three medical centers. Three experienced chest radiologists independently evaluated and detected the pulmonary nodules on 625 cases of LDCT images. The detected nodules were classified into 3 groups: group I (detected by all radiologists); group II (detected by two radiologists); group III (detected by only one radiologist). The consistency with respect to the image features of individual nodules was assessed.

Results

A total of 1,206 nodules were identified by the three radiologists. There were 234 (19.4%) nodules in group I, 377 (31.3%) nodules in group II, and 595 (49.3%) nodules in group III. Logistic regression showed that the size, density, and location of the nodules correlated with the detection of nodules. Nodules sized great than or equal to 4 mm were more consistently identified than nodules sized less than 4 mm. Solid and calcified nodules were more consistently identified than sub-solid nodules. Nodules located in the outer zone were more consistently identified than hilar nodules.

Conclusions

There was considerable inter-reader variability with respect to identification of pulmonary nodules in LDCT. Larger nodules, solid or calcified nodules, and nodules located in the outer zone were more consistently identified.