We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Lobectomy vs. segmentectomy. A propensity score matched comparison of outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Segmentectomy has emerged as a lung parenchymal sparring alternative to the gold standard lobectomy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We hypothesized that there is parity between functional, local recurrence and survival outcomes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Parenchymal sparring procedures including anatomical segmentectomies were propensity score matched 1:1 with lobectomies (n = 64). The primary outcomes included survival, functional and oncological outcomes. The oncological outcomes were: post-operative histology, clear margins and local recurrence rates. Kaplan Meier survival curves were used to compare the survival. Oncological and functional variables were assessed by Fischer exact test and t-test.
RESULTS: The pre-operative performance status, ASA grade, lung function, risk factors, surgical approach and tumour histology were similar between the groups. The tumour size was significantly higher for lobectomies (32.4 ± 17 vs. 24.6 ± 12 mm, p = 0.01). The tumour staging in the segmentectomy group was similar to the lobectomy group (Ia; 50 vs. 34%; Ib: 29 vs. 37%; IIa 11 vs. 9.3%; IIb 5 vs. 14%; IIIa 5 vs. 4.6%, p = 0.83). The loco-regional recurrence was lower in the segmentectomy group (1.5 vs. 3.1%, p = 0.69). The up-staging and down-staging post-surgery was similar in both groups, while neo-adjuvant therapy was used in 5 lobectomy and 3 segmentectomy cases. The survival was similar at 1 year between the groups (88 vs. 92%, p = 0.65). Between 4 and 5 years, the survival reduced in the parenchymal sparing group to 39% vs. 68% in the lobectomy group (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Surgical selection bias could be an important confounder in the selection of patients undergoing segmentectomy. Similar up and down staging were demonstrated in the two groups. This is one of the first studies to investigate the results of segmentectomy versus lobectomy in stage II/IIIa NSCLC tumours. No significant differences were found in functional outcomes, but the survival decreased after 4 years in the segmentectomy group, which could be explained by lower survival in the stage II/IIIa tumours treated with segmentectomy.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Parenchymal sparring procedures including anatomical segmentectomies were propensity score matched 1:1 with lobectomies (n = 64). The primary outcomes included survival, functional and oncological outcomes. The oncological outcomes were: post-operative histology, clear margins and local recurrence rates. Kaplan Meier survival curves were used to compare the survival. Oncological and functional variables were assessed by Fischer exact test and t-test.
RESULTS: The pre-operative performance status, ASA grade, lung function, risk factors, surgical approach and tumour histology were similar between the groups. The tumour size was significantly higher for lobectomies (32.4 ± 17 vs. 24.6 ± 12 mm, p = 0.01). The tumour staging in the segmentectomy group was similar to the lobectomy group (Ia; 50 vs. 34%; Ib: 29 vs. 37%; IIa 11 vs. 9.3%; IIb 5 vs. 14%; IIIa 5 vs. 4.6%, p = 0.83). The loco-regional recurrence was lower in the segmentectomy group (1.5 vs. 3.1%, p = 0.69). The up-staging and down-staging post-surgery was similar in both groups, while neo-adjuvant therapy was used in 5 lobectomy and 3 segmentectomy cases. The survival was similar at 1 year between the groups (88 vs. 92%, p = 0.65). Between 4 and 5 years, the survival reduced in the parenchymal sparing group to 39% vs. 68% in the lobectomy group (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Surgical selection bias could be an important confounder in the selection of patients undergoing segmentectomy. Similar up and down staging were demonstrated in the two groups. This is one of the first studies to investigate the results of segmentectomy versus lobectomy in stage II/IIIa NSCLC tumours. No significant differences were found in functional outcomes, but the survival decreased after 4 years in the segmentectomy group, which could be explained by lower survival in the stage II/IIIa tumours treated with segmentectomy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app