RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to utilize a representative national sample to investigate the factors associated with margin positivity after attempted surgical resection. Given the changes in surgical approaches to lung cancer for the last 10 years, margin positivity and outcomes between robotic, video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open surgical resections may vary. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized the National Cancer Database. Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, 18 or older and who had a surgical lung resection between 2010 and 2019 were included. Demographic data, along with patient-level clinical variables were extracted. Patient-level outcome variables including 30-day, 90-day mortality and readmission rates were analyzed. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess factors associated with margin positivity. RESULTS: A total of 226,884 patients were identified. Of the total cohort, 9229 had positive margins (4.2%). Patients with positive margins had statistically significant increased 30-day, 90-day mortality, as well as increased readmission rate. Older age, male sex, patients undergoing an open resection, patients who underwent a wedge resection, higher clinical stage, larger tumor size, squamous and adenosquamous histologies, and higher Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index were all associated with having a positive margin after resection. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, there was no difference in margin positivity when comparing robotic and VATS resection, however, open resection had increased rates of margin positivity. Increasing tumor size, clinical stage, squamous and adenosquamous histologies, male sex, and patients undergoing a wedge resection were all associated with increased rates of margin positivity.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Margens de Excisão , Pneumonectomia , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , Pneumonectomia/métodos , Pneumonectomia/mortalidade , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/cirurgia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/mortalidade , Cirurgia Torácica Vídeoassistida/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Adulto , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Objectives: Although sublobar resections have gained traction, wedge resections vary widely in quality. We seek to characterize the demographic and facility-level variables associated with high-quality wedge resections. Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried from 2010 to 2018. Patients with T1/T2 N0 M0 non-small cell lung cancer 2 cm or less who underwent wedge resection without neoadjuvant therapy were included. A wedge resection with no nodes sampled or with positive margins was categorized as a low-quality wedge. A wedge resection with 4 or more nodes sampled and negative margins was categorized as a high-quality wedge. Facility-specific variables were investigated via quartile analysis based on the overall volume and proportion of high-quality wedge or low-quality wedge resections performed. Results: A total of 21,742 patients met inclusion criteria, 6390 (29.4%) of whom received a high-quality wedge resection. Factors associated with high-quality wedge resection included treatment at an academic center (3005 [47.0%] vs low-quality wedge 6279 [40.9%]; P < .001). The 30- and 90-day survivals were similar, but patients who received a high-quality wedge resection had improved 5-year survival (4902 [76.7%] vs 10,548 [68.7%]; P < .001). Facilities in the top quartile by volume of high-quality wedge resections performed 69% (4409) of all high-quality wedge resections, and facilities in the top quartile for low-quality wedge resections performed 67.6% (10,378) of all low-quality wedge resections. A total of 113 facilities were in the top quartile by volume for both high-quality wedge and low-quality wedge resections. Conclusions: High-quality wedge resections are associated with improved 5-year survival when compared with low-quality wedge resections. By volume, high-quality wedge and low-quality wedge resections cluster to a minority of facilities, many of which overlap. There is discordance between best practice guidelines and current practice patterns that warrants additional study.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is frequently diagnosed during surgical resection. It remains unclear if lack of preoperative tissue diagnosis influences likelihood of receipt of guideline-concordant care or postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was completed utilizing the National Cancer Database for patients undergoing lung resection with clinical stage 1 NSCLC from 2004 to 2018. Diagnosis during resection was defined as zero days between diagnosis and definitive lung resection. Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Subgroup analyses were completed by resection type, including wedge resection. RESULTS: The cohort included 91,328 patients, 33,517 diagnosed during definitive resection and 57,811 diagnosed preoperatively. For patients diagnosed preoperatively, median time from diagnosis to surgery was 42 days (interquartile range 28-63 days). Patients diagnosed intraoperatively had smaller median tumor size (1.7 cm vs. 2.5 cm, P < .01) and were more likely to undergo wedge resection (10,668 [31.8%] vs. 7,617 [13.2%], P < .01). Intraoperative diagnosis resulted in lower likelihood of nodal sampling (27,356 [81.9%] vs. 53,183 [92.4%], P < .01) and nodal upstaging (2,482 [9.7%] vs. 7701 [15.5%], P < .01). Amongst patients with intraoperative diagnoses, those treated via wedge resection were less likely to undergo lymph node sampling (5,515 [52.0%] vs. 5,606 [61.1%], P < .01). Amongst patients with positive lymph nodes, patients diagnosed intraoperatively were less likely to receive adjuvant therapy (1,677 [5.0%] vs. 5,669 [9.8%], P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative tissue diagnosis of NSCLC is associated with more frequent lymph node harvest, increased rates of upstaging and receipt of adjuvant therapy. Preoperative workup may contribute to increased rates of guideline-concordant lung cancer care.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirurgia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pneumonectomia/métodos , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Linfonodos/patologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly used to treat non-small cell lung cancer. The purpose of this study is to analyze relationships between facility SBRT utilization and surgical patient selection and survival after surgery. METHODS: Data on patients with TI/T2N0M0 lesions and treatment facility characteristics were abstracted from the National Cancer Database, 2008 to 2017. Facilities were stratified using an SBRT/surgery ratio previously associated with short-term survival benefit for patients treated surgically, and by a previously identified surgical volume threshold. Multiple regression analyses, Cox proportional-hazard regressions, and Kaplan-Meier log rank test were employed. RESULTS: In total, 182,610 patients were included. Proportion of high SBRT:surgery ratio (≥17%) facilities increased from 118 (11.5%) to 558 (48.4%) over the study period. Patients undergoing surgery at high-SBRT facilities had comparable comorbidity scores and tumor sizes to those at low-SBRT facilities, and nonclinically significant differences in age, race, and insurance status. Among low-volume surgical facilities, treatment at a high SBRT-using facility was associated with decreased 30-day mortality (1.8% vs 1.4%, P < .001) and 90-day mortality (3.3% vs 2.6%, P < .001). At high-volume surgical facilities, no difference was observed. At 5 years, a survival advantage was identified for patients undergoing resection at facilities with high surgical volumes (hazard ratio, 0.91; confidence interval, 0.90-0.93 P < .001) but not at high SBRT-utilizing facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in short-term survival following resection at facilities with high-SBRT utilization may be attributable to low surgical volume facilities. Patients treated at high volume surgical facilities do not demonstrate differences in short-term or long-term survival based on facility SBRT utilization.