ArticleZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2024
[Clinical Efficacy Analysis of Wedge Resection of Pulmonary in Patients with Small Volume Invasive Lung Adenocarcinoma].
Article in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith further understanding and research into non-small cell lung cancer with tumours ≤2 cm in maximum diameter, segmental lung resection is able to achieve the same long-term prognosis as lobectomy. However, there are few studies on the prognostic effect of wedge resection on small volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma with an invasion depth of 0.5 to 1.0 cm. Therefore, this study focuses on the clinical efficacy and prognosis of wedge resection in patients with small-volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma.
methodsA retrospective analysis of the medical records of 208 patients who underwent surgery in the Department of Thoracic Surgery of the Affiliated Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University from February 2016 to December 2017 was made, and the postoperative pathological results confirmed small volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma. According to their surgical methods, they were divided into lobectomy group (n=115), segmentectomy group (n=48) and wedge resection group (n=45). Kaplan-Meier survival curve estimation and Cox proportional risk regression model were used to explore the influence of different surgical methods on the prognosis of patients with small volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma.
resultsThe wedge resection group had better perioperative outcomes compared with the segmentectomy group and lobectomy group, with statistically significant differences in intraoperative bleeding (P=0.036), postoperative drainage (P<0.001), operative time (P=0.018), postoperative time with tubes (P=0.001), and postoperative complication rate (P=0.006). There were no significant differences when comparing the three groups in terms of survival rate (lobectomy group vs segmentectomy group, P=0.303; lobectomy group vs wedge resection group, P=0.742; and segmentectomy group vs wedge resection group, P=0.278) and recurrence-free survival rate (lobectomy group vs segmentectomy group, P=0.495; lobectomy group vs wedge resection group, P=0.362; segmentectomy group vs wedge resection group, P=0.775). Univariate and multivariate survival analyses showed that consolidation tumor ratio (CTR) was the prognostic factor of overall survival and revurrence-free survival for patients with small-volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma (P<0.05).
conclusionsWedge resection in patients with small volume invasive lung adenocarcinoma can achieve long-term outcomes similar to segmentectomy and lobectomy. When the CTR≤0.5, wedge resection is preferred in such patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.