Righi Ilaria, Maiorca Sebastiano, Diotti Cristina, Bonitta Gianluca, Mendogni Paolo, Tosi Davide, Nosotti Mario, Rosso Lorenzo
Department of Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Diseases, Foundation IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy.
Department of Patho-Physiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
Life (Basel). 2023 Apr 4;13(4):947. doi: 10.3390/life13040947.
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.
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.
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.
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.
近年来,肺段切除术已成为治疗临床I期非小细胞肺癌患者的肺叶切除术替代方案。鉴于文献报道的结果相互矛盾,段切除术的肿瘤学疗效仍存在争议。为了对肿瘤学结果提供新的见解,我们回顾了文献,包括近期的随机试验。
我们使用MEDLINE和Cochrane数据库对1990年至2022年12月期间直径达2 cm的I期非小细胞肺癌的手术治疗进行了系统评价。汇总分析的主要结局是总生存期和无病生存期;次要结局是术后并发症和30天死亡率。
11项研究被纳入荟萃分析。汇总分析分别纳入了3074例接受肺叶切除术和2278例接受段切除术的患者。估计的汇总风险比显示,在总生存期和无病生存期方面,段切除术与肺叶切除术的风险相似。两种手术之间的受限平均生存时间差异在总生存期和无病生存期方面在统计学和临床上均无显著意义。然而,总生存风险比是时间依赖性的:段切除术从术后40个月开始处于劣势。6篇论文报告了30天死亡率:1766例手术中未发生死亡事件。总体相对风险显示,段切除术的术后并发症发生率高于肺叶切除术,但无统计学意义。
我们的结果表明,对于直径达2 cm的I期非小细胞肺癌,段切除术可能是肺叶切除术的有用替代方案。然而,这似乎是时间依赖性的;事实上,从术后40个月开始,段切除术的总死亡率风险比变得不利。这一最新观察结果,连同一些仍未明确的问题(实性/非实性比例、病变深度、适度的功能保留等),为进一步研究段切除术的真正肿瘤学疗效留下了空间。