Dataset Information

Comparison of perioperative and survival outcomes between sublobar resection and lobectomy of patients who underwent a second pulmonary resection.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Repeat pulmonary resection is widely accepted in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare sublobar resection (segmentectomy or wedge resection) with lobectomy in the treatment of patients who underwent a second pulmonary resection.

Methods

This study retrospectively included patients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection for second pulmonary resection. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance selection bias. Clinicopathological features, perioperative and survival outcomes of lobectomy and sublobar resection were compared.

Results

A total of 308 patients who underwent second pulmonary resection were identified: 71 (23.1%) who underwent lobectomy and 237 (76.9%) who underwent sublobar resection. After PSM, 58 patients for each group were selected with well-balanced clinicopathological characteristics. In patients who underwent sublobar resection, significantly shorter chest tube duration (days) (median, 4 vs. 2, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (days) (median, 6 vs. 4, p < 0.001) were observed. There was no significant difference in overall survival between these two groups after the second and first surgery (p = 0.65, p = 0.98), respectively. Subgroup analysis according to the type of the first resection showed consistent results.

Conclusions

Sublobar resection may be considered as an alternative option for second pulmonary resection due to its perioperative advantages and similar survival outcomes compared with lobectomy.

SUBMITTER: Yao X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8410555 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description: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: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.