Monica Casiraghi
Lorenzo Spaggiari- 1Department of Thoracic Surgery, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- 2Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
Editorial on the Research Topic
Strategies of Lymph Node Dissection During Sublobar Resection for Early Stage Lung Cancer
Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the major cause of cancer death, with a poor 5-year survival rate due to the small percentage of patients diagnosed with early-stage disease, and thus potentially being operable and curable (1). Thanks to diffusion of lung cancer screening programs, which are able to reduce lung cancer mortality up to 30% in high-risk subjects, in the last decades surgeons are pushed to deal with a greater number of small nodules and therefore with the need for new and different surgical strategies. Lately, thoracic surgery has been revolutionized by the development of minimally invasive techniques, such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS), but also by the increasing use of limited resection such as sublobar resection (SLR), which is gradually become the treatment of choice for early-stage NSCLC, instead of the traditional lobectomy performed via thoracotomy.
So far, the standard surgical treatment of NSCLC, even in cases of small nodules, has been lobectomy combined with lymph node (LN) dissection (LND) (2). However, looking at the literature it is clear that there is growing interest in SLR, and not only in patients who cannot tolerate a major resection (3), even if the results of these studies are still very controversial.
Despite increasing interest for SLR, different publications (4, 5) still show poor results on local recurrence and survival, regardless of the tumor size, compared to lobectomy, which instead provides satisfactory safety margins and allows removal of the lymphatic networks and intralobar nodes. Gossot et al. in their study showed that the possible reasons for the SLR oncological inferiority compared to lobectomy could be caused by different reasons: (1) some SLRs were wedge resections and not anatomical resections, (2) insufficient resection margins, (3) low number of nodes resected, (4) missing analysis of the so-called “adjacent” nodes, and (5) no frozen section on margins and on the segmental nodes.
On the other hand, many recent studies have demonstrated the non-inferiority of SLR over lobectomies for early-stage NSCLC (6–10), and nowadays, teams are increasingly performing SLR for selected cases of early-stage tumors.
However, as Gossot et al. stated in their study, it is very important, in case of SLR, to follow the same oncological rules for lobectomies, such as performing macroscopically complete resection with free margins and systematic LND, according to the guidelines (11). Insufficient LND during SLR that impacts oncological survival increases local recurrence and misjudging of the stage of the patients, resulting in an incorrect therapeutic approach and a worse survival. Different studies showed that survival was significantly better after lobectomy, except in the subgroup of SLRs associated with lymph node dissection, confirming the importance of a systematic hilar and mediastinal LND during segmentectomies (12–14).
In conclusion, SLR for early-stage NSCLC could be a valid alternative to lobectomy, but the same rules as for lobar resection, such as radical resection with free margins and adequate LND, must be applied.
Author Contributions
MC designed and wrote the editorial. LS supervised the study. Both authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. (2018) 68:394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492
2. Edwards J, Chansky K, Van Schil P, Nicholson A, Boubia S, Brambilla E, et al. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: analysis of resection margin status and proposals for residual tumor descriptors for non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. (2020) 15:344–59. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.10.019
3. Cao C, Tian DH, Wang D, Chung C, Gossot D, Bott M. Sublobar resections—current evidence and future challenges. J Thorac Dis. (2017) 9:4853–5. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2017.11.22
4. Ginsberg L, Rubinstein L. Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Lung cancer study group. Ann Thorac Surg. (1995) 60:615–22. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(95)00537-U
5. Whitson BA, Groth SS, Andrade RS, Maddaus MA, Habermann EB, D'Cunha J. Survival after lobectomy versus segmentectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a population-based analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. (2011) 92:1943–50. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.05.091
6. Takamori S, Oizumi H, Suzuki J, Suzuki K, Kabasawa T. Video-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy for deep and peripheral small lung cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. (2021). doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1722172. [Epub ahead of print].
7. Darras M, Ojanguren A, Forster C, Zellweger M, Perentes J, Krueger T, et al. Short-term local control after VATS segmentectomy and lobectomy for solid NSCLC of less than 2 cm. Thorac Cancer. (2021) 12:453–61. doi: 10.1111/1759-7714.13766
8. Mimae T, Okada M. Are segmentectomy and lobectomy comparable in terms of curative intent for early stage non-small cell lung cancer? Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. (2020) 68:703–6. doi: 10.1007/s11748-019-01219-y
9. Handa Y, Tsutani Y, Mimae T, Miyata Y, Okada M. Complex segmentectomy in the treatment of stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothor Surg. (20200 57:114–21. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezz185
10. Lutz J, Seguin-Givelet A, Grigoroiu M, Brian E, Girard P, Gossot D. Oncological results of full thoracoscopic major pulmonary resections for clinical Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothor Surg. (2019) 55:263–70. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezy245
11. De Leyn P, Dooms C, Kuzdzal J, Lardinois D, Passlick B, Rami-Porta R, et al. Revised ESTS guidelines for preoperative mediastinal lymph node staging for non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. (2014) 45:787–98. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu028
12. Cox M, Yang C, Speicher P, Anderson K, Fitch Z, Gu L, et al. The role of extent of surgical resection and lymph node assessment for clinical stage i pulmonary lepidic adenocarcinoma: an analysis of 1991 patients. J Thorac Oncol. (2017) 12:689–96. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.01.003
13. Mattioli S, Ruffato A, Puma F, Daddi N, Aramini B, D'Ovidio F. Does anatomical segmentectomy allow an adequate lymph node staging for cT1a non-small cell lung cancer? J Thorac Oncol. (2011) 6:1537–41. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182209063
Keywords: NSCLC, sublobar lung resection, lymphadenectomy, segmentectomy, lymph node
Citation: Casiraghi M and Spaggiari L (2022) Editorial: Strategies of Lymph Node Dissection During Sublobar Resection for Early Stage Lung Cancer. Front. Surg. 9:895806. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.895806
Received: 14 March 2022; Accepted: 23 March 2022;
Published: 26 April 2022.
Edited and reviewed by: Robert Cerfolio, New York University, United States
Copyright © 2022 Casiraghi and Spaggiari. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Monica Casiraghi, monica.casiraghi@ieo.it