Single-center clinical experience of extended sleeve lobectomy (ESL) versus standard sleeve lobectomy (SL).

Background

Sleeve lobectomy (SL) and extended SL (ESL), which aim to preserve pulmonary function and enhance the quality of life of patients while ensuring oncological outcomes, are valuable surgical options for the treatment of centrally located non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to compare perioperative adverse events and long-term survival between SL and ESL in NSCLC patients, providing a comprehensive review of surgical outcomes, complications, and survival to assess the roles of SL and ESL in thoracic oncology.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study assessed the outcomes of NSCLC patients who underwent SL or ESL from June 2014 to January 2022. The patients were selected based on specific inclusion criteria, and statistical analyses were conducted to examine the postoperative outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) of the patients.

Results

A total of 218 patients met the inclusion criteria. Among 218 patients, 33 underwent ESL and 185 underwent SL. Compared to SL, ESL was associated with longer operative times and higher R0 resection rates (93.9%

Conclusions

ESL is a feasible and effective alternative for treating centrally located NSCLC, with better R0 resection rates and comparable survival outcomes to SL, without increasing the risk of grade III-IV complications. Further studies with larger cohorts need to be conducted to validate these findings and refine the surgical techniques.

Informations de copyright

2024 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tlcr-24-546/coif). M.B.A. receives consulting fees from Merck, astrazeneca, ethicon, and BMS. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.