Davide Tosi1, Mario Nosotti1, Gianluca Bonitta1, Paolo Mendogni1, Luca Bertolaccini2, Lorenzo Spaggiari2, Alex Brunelli3, Enrico Ruffini4, Pierre Emmanuel Falcoz5. 1. Thoracic Surgery and Lung Transplant Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. 4. Department of Thoracic Surgery, University of Torino, Turin, Italy. 5. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the potential selection criteria for patients scheduled for lobectomy versus segmentectomy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer and to compare the 2 procedures in terms of intraoperative variables and postoperative outcomes using the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) Registry. METHODS: This observational multicentre retrospective cross-sectional study was based on data collected from the ESTS database. The following were set as inclusion criteria: pulmonary lobectomy or segmentectomy for stage I primary lung cancer (according to 8th TNM edition), no previous lung surgery and no induction chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Statistical significance was examined using Mann-Whitney or 2 proportions Z tests. RESULTS: Among 63 542 patients enrolled in the ESTS database (2007-2018), 17 692 met the inclusion criteria: 15 845 patients received lobectomy and 1847 segmentectomy. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy and VATS segmentectomy were the 27.8% and 31.9% of the procedures, respectively. Lobectomy group was significantly younger and had a lower American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) score, lower comorbidities prevalence and better respiratory function. The segmentectomy group had lower complications rate (25.6% vs 33.8%). When considering only the last 5 years, ASA score was similar between the 2 groups, although pulmonary function remained significantly lower in the segmentectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: According to the ESTS database, segmentectomy was preferably offered to 'compromised' patients, with limited respiratory function, higher ASA score and relevant comorbidities. Nevertheless, the procedure showed lower complications rate and similar short-term outcomes compared to lobectomy. During the last 5 years, segmentectomy appeared to be regarded as a valid alternative, even for selected patients who could tolerate both procedures.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the potential selection criteria for patients scheduled for lobectomy versus segmentectomy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer and to compare the 2 procedures in terms of intraoperative variables and postoperative outcomes using the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) Registry. METHODS: This observational multicentre retrospective cross-sectional study was based on data collected from the ESTS database. The following were set as inclusion criteria: pulmonary lobectomy or segmentectomy for stage I primary lung cancer (according to 8th TNM edition), no previous lung surgery and no induction chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Statistical significance was examined using Mann-Whitney or 2 proportions Z tests. RESULTS: Among 63 542 patients enrolled in the ESTS database (2007-2018), 17 692 met the inclusion criteria: 15 845 patients received lobectomy and 1847 segmentectomy. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy and VATS segmentectomy were the 27.8% and 31.9% of the procedures, respectively. Lobectomy group was significantly younger and had a lower American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) score, lower comorbidities prevalence and better respiratory function. The segmentectomy group had lower complications rate (25.6% vs 33.8%). When considering only the last 5 years, ASA score was similar between the 2 groups, although pulmonary function remained significantly lower in the segmentectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: According to the ESTS database, segmentectomy was preferably offered to 'compromised' patients, with limited respiratory function, higher ASA score and relevant comorbidities. Nevertheless, the procedure showed lower complications rate and similar short-term outcomes compared to lobectomy. During the last 5 years, segmentectomy appeared to be regarded as a valid alternative, even for selected patients who could tolerate both procedures.
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Xiaofei Wang; Dennis Wigle; Lin Gu; Gail Darling; Ahmad S Ashrafi; Rodney Landrenau; Daniel Miller; Moishe Liberman; David R Jones; Robert Keenan; Massimo Conti; Gavin Wright; Linda J Veit; Suresh S Ramalingam; Mohamed Kamel; Harvey I Pass; John D Mitchell; Thomas Stinchcombe; Everett Vokes; Leslie J Kohman Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Georgios Stamatis; Gunda Leschber; Birte Schwarz; Diana Lütke Brintrup; Claudia Ose; Gerhard Weinreich; Bernward Passlick; Erich Hecker; Christian Kugler; Hendrik Dienemann; Thomas Krbek; Stephan Eggeling; Rudolf Hatz; Michael Rolf Müller; Walter Weder; Clemens Aigner; Karl-Heinz Jöckel Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Mark W Onaitis; Anthony P Furnary; Andrzej S Kosinski; Liqi Feng; Daniel Boffa; Betty C Tong; Patricia Cowper; Jeffrey P Jacobs; Cameron D Wright; Robert Habib; Joe B Putnam; Felix G Fernandez Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2020-02-29 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Angel Cilleruelo-Ramos; Esther Cladellas-Gutiérrez; Carolina de la Pinta; Laura Quintana-Cortés; Paloma Sosa-Fajardo; Felipe Couñago; Xabier Mielgo-Rubio; Juan Carlos Trujillo-Reyes Journal: World J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-12-24