胸外科学会数据库中的肺叶切除术与叶下切除术:患者因素和淋巴结评估的重要性。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Annals of Thoracic Surgery Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2025.01.004
Gavitt A. Woodard MD , Maria Grau-Sepulveda MD , Mark W. Onaitis MD , Brooks V. Udelsman MD , Elizabeth A. David MD, MAS , Jeffrey P. Jacobs MD , Andrzej S. Kosinski PhD , Justin D. Blasberg MD , Daniel J. Boffa MD
{"title":"胸外科学会数据库中的肺叶切除术与叶下切除术:患者因素和淋巴结评估的重要性。","authors":"Gavitt A. Woodard MD ,&nbsp;Maria Grau-Sepulveda MD ,&nbsp;Mark W. Onaitis MD ,&nbsp;Brooks V. Udelsman MD ,&nbsp;Elizabeth A. David MD, MAS ,&nbsp;Jeffrey P. Jacobs MD ,&nbsp;Andrzej S. Kosinski PhD ,&nbsp;Justin D. Blasberg MD ,&nbsp;Daniel J. Boffa MD","doi":"10.1016/j.athoracsur.2025.01.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Prospective randomized trials have demonstrated noninferior survival between sublobar resection and lobectomy in healthy patients with non-small cell lung cancer with tumors ≤2 cm. However, some patient attributes are not well represented in randomized trials, and uncertainty remains in the widespread applicability of randomized trial nodal dissection protocols.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients with ≤2 cm, node-negative non-small cell lung cancer (cT1 N0) in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons prospective database were linked to Medicare survival data by using a probabilistic matching algorithm. Survival was assessed by propensity score–weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, 20,031 patients were identified, including 11,976 patients who underwent lobectomy, 2586 who underwent segmentectomy, and 5469 who underwent wedge resection. Fewer lymph nodes were sampled in the sublobar resection group (mean, 5.5 vs 12.8), and pathologic upstaging was less common (7.1% vs 14.2%). Overall survival after sublobar and lobar resection was similar within groups understudied in recent trials, including age ≥75 years (<em>P</em> = .07), forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 10% to 59% (<em>P</em> = .14), and Zubrod performance status 2 to 3 (<em>P</em> = .23). When sublobar resection was performed with inadequate nodal evaluation (&lt;2 nodes removed), survival was inferior to survival after lobectomy (<em>P</em> &lt; .001). Among patients with nodal upstaging, lobectomy was not associated with improved survival over sublobar resection (<em>P</em> = .42).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The clinical trial finding that sublobar resections achieve survival similar to that seen with lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer appears to apply to older, less healthy patients in a real-world setting, provided adequate lymph node resection is performed. Performing a lobectomy in the setting of nodal upstaging does not obviously improve survival. Further study is warranted to clarify the role of sublobar resection in the general population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50976,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Thoracic Surgery","volume":"119 5","pages":"Pages 1071-1081"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lobectomy vs Sublobar Resection in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database: Importance of Patient Factors and Lymph Node Evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Gavitt A. Woodard MD ,&nbsp;Maria Grau-Sepulveda MD ,&nbsp;Mark W. Onaitis MD ,&nbsp;Brooks V. Udelsman MD ,&nbsp;Elizabeth A. David MD, MAS ,&nbsp;Jeffrey P. Jacobs MD ,&nbsp;Andrzej S. Kosinski PhD ,&nbsp;Justin D. Blasberg MD ,&nbsp;Daniel J. Boffa MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.athoracsur.2025.01.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Prospective randomized trials have demonstrated noninferior survival between sublobar resection and lobectomy in healthy patients with non-small cell lung cancer with tumors ≤2 cm. However, some patient attributes are not well represented in randomized trials, and uncertainty remains in the widespread applicability of randomized trial nodal dissection protocols.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients with ≤2 cm, node-negative non-small cell lung cancer (cT1 N0) in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons prospective database were linked to Medicare survival data by using a probabilistic matching algorithm. Survival was assessed by propensity score–weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, 20,031 patients were identified, including 11,976 patients who underwent lobectomy, 2586 who underwent segmentectomy, and 5469 who underwent wedge resection. Fewer lymph nodes were sampled in the sublobar resection group (mean, 5.5 vs 12.8), and pathologic upstaging was less common (7.1% vs 14.2%). Overall survival after sublobar and lobar resection was similar within groups understudied in recent trials, including age ≥75 years (<em>P</em> = .07), forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 10% to 59% (<em>P</em> = .14), and Zubrod performance status 2 to 3 (<em>P</em> = .23). When sublobar resection was performed with inadequate nodal evaluation (&lt;2 nodes removed), survival was inferior to survival after lobectomy (<em>P</em> &lt; .001). Among patients with nodal upstaging, lobectomy was not associated with improved survival over sublobar resection (<em>P</em> = .42).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The clinical trial finding that sublobar resections achieve survival similar to that seen with lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer appears to apply to older, less healthy patients in a real-world setting, provided adequate lymph node resection is performed. Performing a lobectomy in the setting of nodal upstaging does not obviously improve survival. Further study is warranted to clarify the role of sublobar resection in the general population.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Thoracic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"119 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1071-1081\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Thoracic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003497525000682\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Thoracic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003497525000682","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:前瞻性随机试验表明,在肿瘤≤2cm的健康非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中,叶下切除术和叶下切除术的生存率均不低。然而,一些患者的属性在随机试验中没有得到很好的体现,随机试验淋巴结清扫方案的广泛适用性仍然存在不确定性。方法:使用概率匹配算法将胸外科学会前瞻性数据库中≤2cm,淋巴结阴性非小细胞肺癌(cT1N0)患者与医疗保险生存数据联系起来。生存率评估采用倾向评分加权Kaplan Meier分析。结果:总共有20,031例患者被确定,包括11,976例肺叶切除术,2,586例节段切除术和5,469例楔形切除术。叶下患者的淋巴结取样较少(平均5.5 vs 12.8),病理分期较少(7.1% vs 14.2%)。在最近的试验中,包括年龄≥75岁(p=0.07)、FEV1=10-59% (p=0.14)和Zubrod性能状态2-3 (p=0.23)在内的未研究组中,叶下和叶下切除后的总生存率相似。结论:临床试验发现,在早期肺癌中,如果进行了充分的淋巴结切除,叶下切除术与叶下切除术的生存率相似,这似乎适用于现实世界中年龄较大、健康状况较差的患者。在淋巴结占优的情况下进行肺叶切除术并不能明显提高生存率。需要进一步的研究来阐明叶下切除术在普通人群中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lobectomy vs Sublobar Resection in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database: Importance of Patient Factors and Lymph Node Evaluation

Background

Prospective randomized trials have demonstrated noninferior survival between sublobar resection and lobectomy in healthy patients with non-small cell lung cancer with tumors ≤2 cm. However, some patient attributes are not well represented in randomized trials, and uncertainty remains in the widespread applicability of randomized trial nodal dissection protocols.

Methods

Patients with ≤2 cm, node-negative non-small cell lung cancer (cT1 N0) in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons prospective database were linked to Medicare survival data by using a probabilistic matching algorithm. Survival was assessed by propensity score–weighted Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results

Overall, 20,031 patients were identified, including 11,976 patients who underwent lobectomy, 2586 who underwent segmentectomy, and 5469 who underwent wedge resection. Fewer lymph nodes were sampled in the sublobar resection group (mean, 5.5 vs 12.8), and pathologic upstaging was less common (7.1% vs 14.2%). Overall survival after sublobar and lobar resection was similar within groups understudied in recent trials, including age ≥75 years (P = .07), forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 10% to 59% (P = .14), and Zubrod performance status 2 to 3 (P = .23). When sublobar resection was performed with inadequate nodal evaluation (<2 nodes removed), survival was inferior to survival after lobectomy (P < .001). Among patients with nodal upstaging, lobectomy was not associated with improved survival over sublobar resection (P = .42).

Conclusions

The clinical trial finding that sublobar resections achieve survival similar to that seen with lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer appears to apply to older, less healthy patients in a real-world setting, provided adequate lymph node resection is performed. Performing a lobectomy in the setting of nodal upstaging does not obviously improve survival. Further study is warranted to clarify the role of sublobar resection in the general population.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Annals of Thoracic Surgery 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
13.00%
发文量
1235
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The mission of The Annals of Thoracic Surgery is to promote scholarship in cardiothoracic surgery patient care, clinical practice, research, education, and policy. As the official journal of two of the largest American associations in its specialty, this leading monthly enjoys outstanding editorial leadership and maintains rigorous selection standards. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery features: • Full-length original articles on clinical advances, current surgical methods, and controversial topics and techniques • New Technology articles • Case reports • "How-to-do-it" features • Reviews of current literature • Supplements on symposia • Commentary pieces and correspondence • CME • Online-only case reports, "how-to-do-its", and images in cardiothoracic surgery. An authoritative, clinically oriented, comprehensive resource, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery is committed to providing a place for all thoracic surgeons to relate experiences which will help improve patient care.
期刊最新文献
Long-Term Survival Advantage of Reoperative Surgical Mitral Valve Replacement Over Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve: A Multicenter Cohort. Cerebral Protection and Chaos Theory: The Butterfly Effect on Display. Pragmatic Evaluation of Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis. The Price of Thoroughness: Lymph Node Dissection and Chylothorax in Lung Resection. Multiarterial Grafting: Increasing Adoption Without Increasing Risk.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1