Short-term local control after VATS segmentectomy and lobectomy for solid NSCLC of less than 2 cm

Co-ablation of lung malignancies with coexisting usual interstitial pneumonia: a retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy

PURPOSE

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of co-ablation (Co-A) for lung malignancies in patients with usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 1,537 consecutive patients treated for malignant lung tumors. UIP was assessed using standard-dose computed tomography (CT). Overall, 14 patients (12 men and two women; mean age ± standard deviation: 71.68 ± 7.83 years, range: 60-87 years) with UIP underwent CT-guided percutaneous Co-A. The mean tumor size was 29.14 mm (standard deviation: 12.60; range: 12-45 mm). Follow-up was performed using CT 1 and 3 months after Co-A. Complications and safety outcomes were also assessed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration for all patients was 3 months (range: 1-5 months). The mortality rate was 0% within 30 d of ablation. Major complications, including pneumonia and bronchopleural fistula, occurred in 14.3% (2/14) of patients. The technical success rate was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Co-A appears to be a safe and effective treatment for lung malignancies in patients with UIP.

[Sublobar resection in early-stage NSCLC: towards a new therapeutic standard?]

Until now, the gold standard surgical treatment for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been pulmonary lobectomy with lymph node dissection. However, several cohort studies have suggested that infra-lobar resection may provide equivalent survival while better preserving quality of life and lung function. The results of two prospective randomized phase III studies comparing sublobar resection (segmentectomy or wedge resection) have recently been published. The JCOG 0802 trial focused on cT1a-b NSCLC and showed significantly better survival in the segmentectomy group, but a higher rate of local recurrence. The CALGB 140503 trial involving stage Ia NSCLC showed no difference in survival and recurrence rate between the two groups. Some questions remain unanswered in these studies, particularly in the CALGB 140503 trial where a majority of patients had an atypical resection. Pending clarification, the complexity of this new surgery calls for oncological rigor in terms of indications and technique, as well as compliance with quality criteria.

Assessing Outcomes in Clinical Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Tumors up to Two Centimeters in Diameter in Segmentectomy vs. Lobectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Lung cancer, which accounted for 1.8 million fatalities in 2020, necessitates the investigation of optimal surgical approaches for early-stage cases. Although lobectomy has long been associated with successful results, the growing interest in segmentectomy as an alternative procedure warrants further examination. The primary objective of this study was to compare segmentectomy with lobectomy as a viable treatment option for early-stage lung cancer. Our systematic review of NSCLC studies comparing lobectomy to segmentectomy followed the PRISMA guidelines and used a random-effects model. We extracted the patient characteristics, outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence), and postoperative complications. Statistical analyses included hazard ratios, risk ratios, sensitivity assessments, and bias evaluations, all of which were performed using a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity among studies. Twelve studies involving 6049 patients revealed that segmentectomy and lobectomy demonstrated comparable overall survival (OS), with an HR of 0.99 (95% CI 0.81-1.21, p = 0.90). At 24 and 60 months, OS rates were RR = 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.97, p = 0.0001) and RR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.98, p = 0.03), respectively. Similarly, disease-free survival (DFS) results were comparable (HR = 1.01; 95% CI 0.86-1.19, p = 0.87). DFS at 24 and 60 months demonstrated RR = 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-1.0, p = 0.05) and RR = 0.82 (95% CI 0.70-0.97, p = 0.02), respectively. The risk of lung cancer recurrence was similar between the two groups (RR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.75-1.30, p = 0.26). Our study revealed that segmentectomy and lobectomy had identical oncological outcomes in terms of OS and DFS. Although segmentectomy showed a slightly higher complication rate, further research is needed to draw definitive conclusions, emphasizing the importance of additional randomized trials.

Segmentectomy vs. Lobectomy in stage IA non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative and survival outcomes

While recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) have suggested superior overall survival (OS) outcomes with segmentectomy over lobectomy, questions remain regarding the comparability of these surgical procedures for treating early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthetize existing evidence and to compare the survival outcomes observed for stage IA NSCLC following segmentectomy or lobectomy. 40 studies (38 observational, 2 RCTs) encompassing 103,926 patients were analyzed. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrences, harvested lymph nodes, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay. Risk of bias was assessed using established tools, and evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE. Non-RCTs showed an OS HR of 1.10 (95 % CI: 0.94-1.30, p = 0.24) with low certainty, contrasting with RCTs' HR of 0.82 (95 % CI: 0.66-1.02, p = 0.7) with moderate certainty. Local recurrences exhibited OR 1.40 (95 % CI: 0.94-2.08, p = 0.09) in non-RCTs with low certainty, and RR 1.61 (95 % CI: 1.12-2.31, p = 0.01) in RCTs with low certainty. Non-RCTs showed DFS HR 1.13 (95 % CI: 0.95-1.34, p = 0.18) with low certainty, while RCTs yielded HR 1.00 (95 % CI: 0.85-1.18, p = 0.97) with moderate certainty. Lobectomy resulted in more harvested lymph nodes. Postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay did not differ significantly. While definitive evidence for OS, DFS, and postoperative outcomes differences was inconclusive, a potential increase in local recurrences following lobectomy was noted. Further well-designed studies are warranted to enhance evidence and inform clinical practice in stage I lung cancer surgery.

Oncological Outcomes of Sub-Lobar Resection Versus Lobectomy for Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Although lobectomy has been the treatment of choice for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), sub-lobar resection (i.e., segmentectomy or wedge resection) has emerged as an alternative over time due to its ability to preserve additional lung function. This meta-analysis explores the survival outcomes of sub-lobar resection versus lobectomy in patients with stage I NSCLC (tumor size: ≤2 cm).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception up to July 28, 2023. The hazard ratios and odds ratios for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and mortality were calculated using the random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies, comprising 10,449 patients, were included. Sub-lobar resection demonstrated comparable OS and DFS to that of lobectomy. Similarly, there was no significant risk of mortality associated with any of the groups. However, the subgroup analysis according to patient selection (intentional, compromised, not specified, and both [intentional and compromised]) showed that the patients in the compromised subgroup had a poor DFS with sub-lobar resection as compared to lobectomy (hazard ratio: 1.52, confidence interval: 1.14-2.02, P = 0.004). Additionally, there was no significant difference in OS, DFS, or overall mortality in the results stratified by surgical procedure or patient selection.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients with stage I NSCLC who underwent sub-lobar resection showed a significantly worse DFS and OS in the "compromised group." However, there was no overall significant difference in OS, DFS, or mortality in the sub-lobar resection group as compared to lobectomy.

Complete anatomic segmentectomy shows improved oncologic outcomes compared to incomplete anatomic segmentectomy

OBJECTIVES

To compare oncologic outcomes after segmentectomy with division of segmental bronchus, artery and vein (complete anatomic segmentectomy) versus segmentectomy with division of <3 segmental structures (incomplete anatomic segmentectomy).

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective analysis of patients undergoing segmentectomy from March 2005 to May 2020. Operative reports were audited to classify procedures as complete or incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy or pulmonary resection beyond indicated segments were excluded. Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier models and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for death. Cumulative incidence functions for loco-regional recurrence were compared with Gray's test, with death considered a competing event. Cox and Fine-Gray models were used to estimate cause-specific and subdistribution HRs, respectively, for loco-regional recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 390 cases, 266 (68.2%) were complete and 124 were incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. Demographics, pulmonary function, tumour size, stage and perioperative outcomes did not significantly differ between groups. Surgical margins were negative in all but 1 case. Complete anatomic segmentectomy was associated with improved lymph node dissection (5 vs 2 median nodes sampled; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed reduced incidence of loco-regional recurrence (cause-specific HR = 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.80; subdistribution HR = 0.43; 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.81), and non-significant improvement in overall survival (HR = 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-1.00) after complete versus incomplete anatomic segmentectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This single-centre experience suggests complete anatomic segmentectomy provides superior loco-regional control and may improve survival relative to incomplete anatomic segmentectomy. We recommend surgeons perform complete anatomic segmentectomy and lymph node dissection whenever possible.

Differential efficacy of segmentectomy and wedge resection in sublobar resection compared to lobectomy for solid-dominant stage IA lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, the impact of sublobar resection versus lobectomy on the prognosis of solid-dominant stage IA lung cancer is contradictory in different studies, which requires further exploration.

METHODS

The authors analyzed 26 studies, including one randomized controlled trial and retrospective cohort studies. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effects or random-effects models based on heterogeneity levels.

RESULTS

The analysis included 12 667 patients, with 3488 undergoing sublobar resections and 9179 receiving lobectomies. The overall analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) (HR=1.28, 95% CI: 0.98-1.69) between sublobar resection and lobectomy, but lobectomy was associated with better recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.10-1.75). Subgroup analyses revealed that, for tumors with a diameter ≤2 cm, sublobar resection versus lobectomy showed no significant difference in OS but sublobar resection had lower RFS. For 2-3 cm tumors, both OS and RFS were significantly lower in the sublobar resection group. When consolidation-to-tumor ratio (CTR) ranged from 0.5 to <1, OS did not differ significantly, but RFS was significantly lower in sublobar resection. Lung cancers with CTR=1 showed significantly lower OS and RFS in the sublobar resection group. Segmentectomy provided similar OS and RFS compared to lobectomy, while wedge resection had a detrimental effect on patient prognosis. However, wedge resection may have provided comparable outcomes for patients aged 75 years or older.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that segmentectomy and lobectomy yield similar oncological outcomes. However, compared to lobectomy, wedge resection is associated with a poorer prognosis. Nevertheless, for elderly patients, wedge resection is also a reasonable surgical option.

Minimally invasive segmentectomy and lobectomy for peripheral stage IA1-2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a case-matched cohort study from a UK Centre

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to compare in a real-world series the short- and long-term results of segmentectomy and lobectomy for peripheral clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Single-centre cohort study including a series of consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive segmentectomy or lobectomy for peripheral (outer third of the lung) clinical stage IA NSCLC (January 2017-August 2022). Propensity score case matching analysis generated 2 matched groups of patients undergoing segmentectomy or lobectomy. Short-term (morbidity and mortality) and long-term [overall survival and event-free survival (EFS)] outcomes were compared between the 2 matched groups. EFS was calculated by including death resulting from any cause and any recurrence as events.

RESULTS

Propensity score generated 118 pairs of patients undergoing minimally invasive segmentectomy or lobectomy. The median follow-up was 30 months (95% confidence limits (CL) 4-64). The median postoperative length of stay was 4 days in both groups. Ninety-day mortality was similar (segmentectomy 2.5% versus lobectomy 1.7%, P = 1). Three-year overall survival [segmentectomy 87% (76-93) versus lobectomy 81% (72-88), P = 0.73] and EFS [segmentectomy 82% (72-90) versus lobectomy 78% (68-84), P = 0.52] did not differ between the groups. Loco-regional recurrence rate [segmentectomy 4.2% (5/118) versus lobectomy 9.3% (11/118), P = 0.19] was similar despite a lower nodal upstaging [segmentectomy 3.4% (4/118) versus lobectomy 14% (17/118), P = 0.005]. The occurrence of compromised resection margins (pR1 or pR uncertain) was similar between the groups [segmentectomy 7.6% (9/118) versus lobectomy 9.3% (11/118), P = 0.81].

CONCLUSIONS

This observational series confirms the non-inferiority of segmentectomy compared to lobectomy in treating peripherally located stage IA NSCLC.

Three-Dimensional Imaging-Guided Lung Anatomic Segmentectomy: A Single-Center Preliminary Experiment

Background and objectives: VATS segmentectomy has been proven to be effective in the treatment of stage I NSCLC, but its technical complexity remains one of the most challenging aspects for thoracic surgeons. Furthermore, 3D-CT reconstruction images can help in planning and performing surgical procedures. In this paper, we present our personal experience of 11 VATS anatomical resections performed after accurate pre-operative planning with 3D reconstructions. Materials and methods: A 3D virtual model of the lungs, airways, and vasculature was obtained, starting from a 1.25 mm 3-phase contrast CT scan, and the original images were used for the semi-automatic segmentation of the lung parenchyma, airways, and tumor. Results: Six males and five females were included in this study. The median diameter of the pulmonary lesion at the pre-operative chest CT scan was 20 mm. The surgical indication was confirmed in seven patients: in three cases, a lobectomy, instead of a segmentectomy, was needed due to intraoperative findings of nodal metastasis. Meanwhile, only in one case, we performed a lobectomy because of inadequate surgical resection margins. Skin-to-skin operative average time was 142 (IQR 1-3 105-182.5) min. The median post-operative stay was 6 (IQR 1-3 3.5-7) days. The mean value of the closest surgical margin was 13.7 mm. Conclusion: Image-guided reconstructions are a useful tool for surgeons to perform complex resections in order to spare healthy parenchyma and to ensure disease-free margins. Nevertheless, human skill and surgeon experience still remain fundamental for the final decisions regarding the proper resection to perform.

Clinical and Oncological Outcomes after Uniportal Anatomical Segmentectomy for Stage IA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background and Objectives: The existing literature comparing sublobar and lobar resection in the treatment of stage IA lung cancer highlights the trend and overall need for further evaluation of minimally invasive, parenchymal-sparing techniques. The role of uniportal minimally invasive segmentectomy in the oncological therapy of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and midterm oncological outcomes of patients who underwent uniportal video-assisted anatomical segmentectomy for pathological stage IA lung cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all patients with pathological stage IA lung cancer (8th edition UICC) who underwent uniportal minimally invasive anatomical segmentectomy at our institution from January 2015 to December 2018. Results: 85 patients, 54 of whom were men, were included. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days (1.-3. IQR 3-5), whereas 30-day morbidity was 15.3% (13 patients), and the in-hospital mortality rate was 1.2% (1 patient). The 3-year overall survival rate was 87.9% for the total population. It was 90.5% in the IA1 group, 93.3% in the IA2 group, and 70.1% in the IA3 group, respectively. Conclusions: There were satisfactory short-term clinical outcomes with low 30-day morbidity and mortality and promising midterm oncological survival results following uniportal minimally invasive anatomical segmentectomy for pathological stage IA non-small cell lung cancer.

Oncological Outcomes of Segmentectomy versus Lobectomy in Clinical Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer up to Two Centimeters: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective. In recent years, pulmonary segmentectomy has emerged as an alternative to lobectomy for the treatment of patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Considering the conflicting results reported in the literature, the oncological effectiveness of segmentectomy remains controversial. To provide new insight into oncological results, we reviewed the literature, including recent randomized trials. Methods. We performed a systematic review for surgical treatment of stage I NSCLC up to 2 cm using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database from 1990 to December 2022. Primary outcomes for pooled analysis were overall and disease-free survival; secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and 30-day mortality. Results. Eleven studies were considered for the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis included 3074 and 2278 patients who received lobectomy and segmentectomy, respectively. The estimated pooled hazard ratio showed a similar hazard for segmentectomy compared to lobectomy in terms of overall and disease-free survival. The restricted mean survival time difference between the two procedures was statistically and clinically not significant for overall and disease-free survival. Nevertheless, the overall survival hazard ratio was time-dependent: segmentectomy was at a disadvantage starting from 40 months after surgery. Six papers reported 30-day mortality: there were no events on 1766 procedures. The overall relative risk showed that the postoperative complication rate was higher in segmentectomy compared to lobectomy, without statistical significance. Conclusions. Our results suggest that segmentectomy might be a useful alternative to lobectomy for stage I NSCLC up to 2 cm. However, this appears to be time-dependent; in fact, the risk ratio for overall mortality becomes unfavorable for segmentectomy starting at 40 months after surgery. This last observation, together with some still undefined questions (solid/non-solid ratio, depth of the lesion, modest functional savings, etc.), leave room for further investigations on the real oncological effectiveness of segmentectomy.

Local control and short-term outcomes after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery segmentectomy versus lobectomy for pT1c pN0 non-small-cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes and local control in pT1c pN0 non-small-cell lung cancer that were intentionally treated by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy or segmentectomy.

METHODS

Multicentre retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing VATS lobectomy (VL) or VATS segmentectomy (VS) for pT1c pN0 non-small-cell lung cancer from January 2014 to October 2021. Patients' characteristics, postoperative outcomes and survival were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 162 patients underwent VL (n = 81) or VS (n = 81). Except for age [median (interquartile range) 68 (60-73) vs 71 (65-76) years; P = 0.034] and past medical history of cancer (32% vs 48%; P = 0.038), there was no difference between VL and VS in terms of demographics and comorbidities. Overall 30-day postoperative morbidity was similar in both groups (34% vs 30%; P = 0.5). The median time for chest tube removal [3 (1-5) vs 2 (1-3) days; P = 0.002] and median postoperative length of stay [6 (4-9) vs 5 (3-7) days; P = 0.039] were in favour of the VS group. Significantly larger tumour size (mean ± standard deviation 25.1 ± 3.1 vs 23.6 ± 3.1 mm; P = 0.001) and an increased number of lymph nodes removal [median (interquartile range) 14 (9-23) vs 10 (6-15); P < 0.001] were found in the VL group. During the follow-up [median (interquartile range) 31 (14-48) months], no statistical difference was found for local and distant recurrence in VL groups (12.3%) and VS group (6.1%) (P = 0.183). Overall survival (80% vs 80%) was comparable between both groups (P = 0.166).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a short follow-up, our preliminary data shows that local control is comparable for VL and VS.

Minimally Invasive Anatomical Segmentectomy versus Lobectomy in Stage IA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess potential differences in perioperative outcomes and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with pathological stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent minimally invasive anatomical segmentectomy or lobectomy.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search of EMBASE (through Ovid), MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted. Two researchers independently reviewed each eligible study that included patients with stage IA NSCLC who underwent minimally invasive anatomical segmentectomy and lobectomy and compared perioperative and/or survival outcomes of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 887 publications were identified. Of these, 10 articles met our eligibility criteria. A significantly higher number of lymph nodes were harvested in lobectomies. The two groups did not significantly differ in postoperative complication rates, DFS, and OS. Patients who underwent segmentectomy had shorter postoperative hospital stays.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive lobectomy and segmentectomy showed comparable short-term and long-term outcomes in stage IA NSCLC patients. Postoperative complication rates were similar. Minimally invasive lobectomies are associated with a higher number of harvested lymph nodes, although this did not affect the final staging or the survival outcomes.

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for early stage non-small cell lung cancer: a study based on the SEER database and a Chinese cohort

Objective

This study aimed to construct a nomogram to effectively predict the overall survival (OS) of patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

For the training and internal validation cohorts, a total of 26,941 patients with stage I and II NSCLC were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A nomogram was constructed based on the risk factors affecting prognosis using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. And 505 patients were recruited from Jiaxing First Hospital for external validation. The discrimination and calibration of the nomogram were evaluated by C-index and calibration curves.

Results

A Nomogram was created after identifying independent prognostic factors using univariate and multifactorial factor analysis. The C-index of this nomogram was 0.726 (95% CI, 0.718–0.735) and 0.721 (95% CI, 0.709–0.734) in the training cohort and the internal validation cohort, respectively, and 0.758 (95% CI, 0.691–0.825) in the external validation cohort, which indicates that the model has good discrimination. Calibration curves for 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS probabilities showed good agreement between predicted and actual survival. In addition, DCA analysis showed that the net benefit of the new model was significantly higher than that of the TNM staging system.

Conclusion

We developed and validated a survival prediction model for patients with non-small cell lung cancer in the early stages. This new nomogram is superior to the traditional TNM staging system and can guide clinicians to make the best clinical decisions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10067-8.