Feasibility and effectiveness of segmentectomy versus wedge resection for clinical stage I non-small-cell lung cancer

Abstract OBJECTIVES With recent improvements in surgical techniques for segmentectomy, we hypothesized that segmentectomy is feasible and more effective than wedge resection for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared perioperative and oncological outcomes for segmentectomy and wedge resection. METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of 720 patients who underwent sublobar resection (segmentectomy, 479; wedge resection, 241) for clinical stage 0 or I NSCLC from January 2017 to June 2020. An adequate surgical margin was defined as a surgical margin distance of ≥2 cm or ≥ the total tumour size. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method for clinical stage IA. RESULTS There was no significant difference in the rate of major (grade ≥III) complications between segmentectomy (1.7%) and wedge resection (1.2%) (P = 0.76). The probability of obtaining adequate surgical margins was significantly higher with segmentectomy (71.4%) versus wedge resection (59.5%) (P = 0.002), and the difference was especially prominent for clinical stage IA2 (75.3% vs 56.9%; P = 0.012). Among patients with clinical stage IA, segmentectomy significantly improved the RFS compared with wedge resection (hazard ratio 2.7; 95% confidence interval 1.60–4.61; log-rank P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis based on the tumour status revealed that segmentectomy had a better RFS in clinical stage IA2 (P < 0.001) and in pure-solid tumours (P = 0.022) than wedge resection. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrate that segmentectomy is a feasible procedure with comparable safety outcomes and better surgical margins and cancer control than wedge resection, particularly for clinical stage IA2 NSCLC.