HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Antonio E. Martin-Ucar Apostolos Nakas John E. Pilling David A. Waller Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Martin-Ucar, A. E. Articles by Waller, D. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Martin-Ucar, A. E. Articles by Waller, D. A. Related Collections Lung - cancer

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005;27:675-679
© 2005 Elsevier Science NL

A case-matched study of anatomical segmentectomy versus lobectomy for stage I lung cancer in high-risk patients

Department of Thoracic Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK

Received 1 September 2004; received in revised form 30 December 2004; accepted 3 January 2005.

^* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 116 256 3959; fax: +44 116 236 7768. (E-mail: david.waller{at}uhl-tr.nhs.uk).

	Abstract

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
Objective: Sublobar resections may offer a method of increasing resection rates in patients with lung cancer and poor lung function, but are thought to increase recurrence and therefore compromise survival for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To test this hypothesis we have compared the long-term outcome from lobectomy and anatomical segmentectomy in high-risk cases as defined by predicted postoperative FEV₁ (ppoFEV₁) less than 40%. Methods: Over a 7-year period 55 patients (27% of all resections for stage I NSCLC) with ppoFEV₁<40% underwent resection of stage I NSCLC. The 17 patients who underwent anatomical segmentectomy were individually matched to 17 patients operated by lobectomy on the bases of gender, age, use of VATS, tumour location and respiratory function. We compared their perioperative course, tumour recurrence and survival. Results: There were no significant differences in hospital mortality (one case in each group), complications or hospital stay. Overall 5-year survival was 69%. There were no differences in recurrence rates (18% in both groups) or survival (64% after lobectomy and 70% after segmentectomy). There was preservation of pulmonary function after segmentectomy (median gain of 12%) compared to lobectomy (median loss of 12%) (P=0.02). Conclusions: Anatomical segmentectomy allowed for surgical resection in patients with stage I NSCLC and impaired respiratory reserve without compromising oncological results but with preservation in respiratory function.

Key Words: Lung resection • Outcomes • Thoracic surgery

	1. Introduction

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
Anatomical lobectomy is the procedure of choice in stage I NSCLC [1]. Available data and guidelines for operability in the management of these patients state that patients with a predicted postoperative FEV₁ (ppoFEV₁) of less than 40% of predicted are at risk of complications if surgical resection is undertaken [2,3]. This group of patients with significant impairment of respiratory reserve may benefit of a limited resection [3–5]. Non-anatomical sublobar resections have been associated with an increase rate of local recurrence [1]. However, anatomical segmentectomies have been employed in high-risk cases and reported as case-control studies with similar results as lobectomy [6,7]. We have used anatomical segmentectomy with systematic nodal dissection as part of our commitment to provide the option of surgery in patients not fit for traditional lobectomy. We report a case-matched comparison between segmentectomy and lobectomy in high-risk cases (ppoFEV₁<40%).

	2. Methods

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
2.1. Design of the study
Over a 7-year period (April 1997–April 2004) 203 resections for stage I NSCLC were performed in a single-surgeon practice. A calculation of the predicted postoperative FEV₁ (ppoFEV₁) according to the number of segments to be removed [8] identified that 55 of these patients (27%) had a ppoFEV₁ of less than 40%. The 17 patients who underwent anatomical segmentectomy were individually matched to 17 patients operated by standard lobectomy on the bases of gender, age, use of Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS), tumour size and location, and ppoFEV₁. We compared their perioperative course, tumour recurrence and survival.

2.2. Operative technique
With the patient under general anaesthesia and double lumen endotracheal intubation and a thoracic epidural catheter the affected lung is deflated. The segmentectomy is performed with division of the segmental bronchi and vessels of the areas affected. The parenchymal excision is taken distal to the intersegmental fissures and normally performed with the use of staplers. When tumours were close to intersegmental fissures then a bi- or tri-segmentectomy is performed to ensure complete excision with wide margins. A systematic nodal dissection is performed in all pulmonary resections (Naruke stations 2, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10 in right sided resections and stations 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 in left sided ones). When VATS techniques were applied, the procedures were identical as when thoracotomy was used (individual division of vessels and bronchus, incorporating the intersegmental plane in the resected specimen) and a specimen retrieval bag was used.

Following the resection a single intercostal drain is inserted and connected to an underwater seal system. The endotracheal tube is removed at the end of the procedure and the patients are transferred to the High Dependency Unit in the Thoracic Ward. Early ambulation and physiotherapy are encouraged during the postoperative period and aided by the routine use of flutter-valve drain systems.

2.3. Statistical analysis
The data is presented as median (range) and number (%) unless stated. Univariate analysis was performed using the ² test for qualitative and Wilcoxon rank test for paired quantitative data. Postoperative survival was plotted according to the Kaplan–Meier method and any difference in survival between the groups was evaluated with the Log-Rank test. Statistical significance was defined by P values <0.05 throughout the study.

	3. Results

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
3.1. Preoperative characteristics
The median age of the 22 male and 12 female was 70 (range 55–83) years. The mean FEV₁ was 43.7% (range 19–54) of predicted, with a mean ppoFEV1 of 32.6% (14–40%). The preoperative characteristics and operative details of the two groups were very similar as a result of the matching process (Table 1). All patients had undergone preoperative staging CT scan, but we did not routinely performed mediastinoscopy or PET scan in patients with radiological stage I lung cancer.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Comparison of the actuarial survival in the two groups. Log-Rank P=0.14.

	4. Discussion

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
The rationale of performing sublobar resections for early stage NSCLC is based in the principle that surgery only aims to control local disease and that can be achieved with limited removal of lung parenchyma [6,9]. The same arguments that led to the replacement of pneumonectomy by lobectomy as the gold standard operation for early lung cancer (similar survival can be obtained with a less extensive resection) could be applied to sublobar procedures [10].

Jensik and colleagues [11] described the role of anatomical segmentectomy as the procedure of choice in patients with early NSCLC in a group of 69 patients achieving a 56% 5-year survival. The same group reported later on a 53% 5-year survival on 168 patients who underwent segmentectomy for stage I NSCLC [12]. Other authors have followed on their reports with variable results [13,14]. The best evidence available is currently the prospective randomized trial performed by the Lung Cancer Study Group [1]. It resulted of a significant increase in the rate of locoregional recurrence when non-anatomical wedge resections were performed instead of lobectomy. However, there were no significant differences between lobectomy and anatomical segmentectomy. In addition, there were no differences in survival between lobectomy and limited resections. The results confirmed other reports in that the oncological results with the use of wedge resection in patients with primary lung cancer were compromised, but not with anatomical segmentectomy [15–18].

The use of segmentectomies has also been reported in the context of patients with compromised respiratory function, although the reports are mainly single series or case control studies with no randomization [19]. We were only able to find a comparison between individually matched cases undergoing lobectomy or segmentectomy for stage I NSCLC with similar 5-year survival between the groups in a report with similar methodology to our manuscript [20].

Our results in term of pulmonary function preservation after segmentectomy in relation to lobectomy in patients with stage I NSCLC coincide with a recent report [16]. In addition, the authors reported 4-year survival rates comparable with our results (62 and 67% after segmentectomy and lobectomy, respectively). The authors recommended the use of anatomical segmentectomy whenever anatomically feasible.

The loss of respiratory function after lobectomy (12%) in our report is greater than the ones reported by others [21,22]. This may be explained by the fact that there were no cases of right upper or middle lobectomy included in this study, which involve excision of less pulmonary segments.

We, like other authors, have already reported the benefit of performing lobectomy in patients with lung carcinoma within an emphysematous lobe with severely impaired respiratory function [23,24]. That experience mainly involved patients undergoing right upper lobectomy and resulted in an increased pulmonary function following surgery [25]. We therefore have not performed segmentectomies in the right upper or middle lobes.

We acknowledge are potential areas of bias in our work. It is the result of a retrospective study and in no way randomized, although being able to match individually patients in the two groups makes our manuscript more powerful than a case control-study. We were able to complete the data and the follow-up in every case but we cannot provide any information of patients not referred for surgery or those in which surgery was not performed. Also the use of other preoperative tests (although not proven to affect long-term survival) such as transfer factor measurement, exercise testing or nuclear perfusion scans were not obtained in all patients, so there are not included in our report. We unfortunately cannot comment on the quality of life after surgery, as we do not perform health status measurements following lung cancer surgery. In addition, we do not perform routine CT scans during the follow-up period to exclude recurrences unless it is indicated by clinical examination, symptoms or new abnormalities on chest radiograph.

In summary, our results indicate that in the context of patients with severe impairment of their respiratory reserve anatomical resection of early stage NSCLC is feasible with good long-term outcomes. The oncological value of anatomical segmentectomy with systematic lymph node dissection is comparable to the one of lobectomy in these patients but with preservation of lung function. However, this conservation of lung function does not correlate with reduced morbidity or improved survival, although may equate to improved quality of life. As our efforts are targeted on increasing resection rates, we feel that anatomical segmentectomy should be considered among the alternative treatment options in this high-risk group of patients.

	Appendix A. Conference discussion

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 
Dr W. Klepetko (Vienna, Austria): Was this a retrospective study or a prospective study?

Dr Martin-Ucar: This was a retrospective study.

Dr M. Dusmet (London, UK): Essentially you have patients with very poor function who actually are ideal patients for a lung-volume reduction procedure in terms of their type of emphysema, heterogeneity, et cetera, and have a cancer in the target zone for volume reduction, and you can do a combined lobectomy/lung-volume reduction procedure and get the benefits of both procedures in one operation. Did any of your patients fit into this category?

Dr Martin-Ucar: Yes, we are aware of that. We did publish our results in the past of especially right upper lobe tumors which underwent a lobectomy which were patients suitable for lung-volume reduction surgery. In this group of patients we were able to have perfusion data in about 90% of them, and none of these patients had heterogeneous emphysema with a target area in the lobe that was going to be resected. Most of them are lower lobes, but they don't get the benefit in the spirometry that you would expect in the lobar lung-volume reduction.

Dr A. Brutel de la Riviere (Utrecht, The Netherlands): You have spoken about segmentectomy versus lobectomy, but you haven't told us if any segmental resections had ever been converted to a lobectomy. What is your experience about conversion?

Dr Martin-Ucar: It wouldn't be figured in this retrospective series, obviously. Certainly if we weren't happy that we performed a complete excision, then we will do a lobectomy, without a doubt.

Dr Brutel de la Riviere: So you have no experience with starting a patient as a segmental resection and then being forced by, for instance, the tumor location to do a lobectomy, as I guess that would jeopardize the final result.

Dr Martin-Ucar: Oh, of course, yes. This is not a study of intention to treat. This is a retrospective study of the results.

Dr Brutel de la Riviere: Could you elaborate a bit for us on your technique of segmental resection? Is this blunt dissection, fingering out the segmental plane, or were any staple devices used?

Dr Martin-Ucar: We mainly used staples. We identified the segmental plane by the use of CPAP after the bronchus was dissected.

Dr P.L. Filosso (Torino, Italy): We recently reviewed our series of Stage I lung cancer and we observed the same results you present. From the oncological point of view, we noticed that there is not statistical significant difference between lobectomy and segmental or wedge resection. In our clinical experience, these limited surgical procedures are addressed to high-risk patients, only.

Otherwise we observed that the most important factors influencing prognosis are: (a) the presence of visceral pleural invasion; (b) the tumour size and (c) its histology. Did you observe the same results?

Dr Martin-Ucar: Yes, I agree with you. However, the type of tumor was similar in the two groups because of the matching system.

Dr H-B. Ris (Lausanne, Switzerland): Can you explain the difference in your results as compared to those published by the prospective Lung Cancer Study Group Trial? Is it a problem of patient selection, and, if so, what was the difference between your results and those reported by the lung cancer trial?

Dr Martin-Ucar: The lung cancer trial, the implications in terms of local resection and maybe survival were mainly due to the worse results in the wedge resection, in the nonanatomical sublobar resections. They did not find a statistical significance between anatomical segmentectomies and lobectomies, although obviously that paper is open to many discussions because of the methodology. Theirs was a randomized study, obviously, and this is probably the second best thing. We haven't suggested a randomized trial before because we didn't have any data of our own to support that, but I think a new one is warranted.

Dr Ris: But have you done some reflection as to why you have a difference as compared to these reported results?

Dr Martin-Ucar: I don't think there was a difference between the segmentectomy group in their trial and ours.

Dr W. Klepetko: I think the message you give us is that oncologically the segmentectomy is equal to the results of lobectomy. However, there is another message in your paper as well. If you look at it from the functional point of view, you could turn it over and say lobectomy in those patients who have pronounced hyperinflation has the same functional result as segmentectomy. And, in addition, I think we have to question the oncological result that you are presenting to us because the number of cases that you have been introducing in this study does not allow you to draw any meaningful statistical conclusions.

So my very last question is, how did you calculate the estimated difference between the two groups and what was the number of patients you calculated to meet the statistical significance?

Dr Martin-Ucar: That's the number of patients that we have available. Let's put it that way. We didn't have any power statistics performed. It is having this control group of the lobectomies, of the 38 lobectomies of the high-risk group/stage I lung cancer that allows us to do a matching process. So the answer is I don't know what the power statistics will be. I do agree with you, however, that certainly a lobectomy seems to be a good operation even in the high-risk cases. I don't have a problem with that. We fully support that.

	Footnotes

 
Presented at the joint 18th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery and the 12th Annual Meeting of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Leipzig, Germany, September 12–15, 2004.

	References

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Methods 3. Results 4. Discussion Appendix A. Conference... References

 

1. Ginsberg RJ, Rubinstein LV. Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Lung cancer study group. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60(3):615-622[discussion 622–3].[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Datta D, Lahiri B. Preoperative evaluation of patients undergoing lung resection surgery. Chest 2003;123(6):2096-2103.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. British thoracic society guidelines: guidelines on the selection of patients with lung cancer for surgery. Thorax 2001;56(2):89-108.[Free Full Text]
4. Deslauriers J, Gregorie J. Surgical therapy of early non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2000;117:104S-109S.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Miller JI. Physiologic evaluation of pulmonary function in the candidate for lung resection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;105:347-352.[Abstract]
6. Peters RM. The role of limited resection in carcinoma of the lung. Am J Surg 1982;143(6):706-710.[Medline]
7. Pastorino U, Valente M, Bedini V, Infante M, Tavecchio L, Ravasi G. Limited resection for stage I lung cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1991;17(1):42-46.[Medline]
8. Pierce RJ, Copland JM, Sharpe K, Barter CE. Preoperative risk evaluation for lung cancer resection: predicted postoperative product as a predictor of surgical mortality. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994;150(4):947-955.[Abstract]
9. Sugarbaker DJ. Lung cancer 6: the case for limited surgical resection in non-small cell lung cancer. Thorax 2003;58(7):639-641.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Churchill ED, Sweet RH, Soutter L, Scannell JG. The surgical management of carcinoma of the lung. A study of the cases treated at the Massachusetts general hospital from to 1950. J Thorac Surg 1930;20:349-365.
11. Jensik RJ, Faber LP, Milloy FJ, Monson DO. Segmental resection for lung cancer. A fifteen-year experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1973;66(4):563-572.[Medline]
12. Jensik RJ, Faber LP, Kittle CF. Segmental resection for bronchogenic carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 1979;28(5):475-483.[Abstract]
13. Landreneau RJ, Sugarbaker DJ, Mack MJ, Hazelrigg SR, Luketich JD, Fetterman L, Liptay MJ, Bartley S, Boley TM, Keenan RJ, Ferson PF, Weyant RJ, Naunheim KS. Wedge resection versus lobectomy for stage I (T1 N0 M0) non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;113(4):691-698.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Warren WH, Faber LP. Segmentectomy versus lobectomy in patients with stage I pulmonary carcinoma. Five-year survival and patterns of intrathoracic recurrence. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;107(4):1087-1093.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Jones DR, Stiles BM, Denlinger CE, Antippa P, Daniel TM. Pulmonary segmentectomy: results and complications. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;76(2):343-348[discussion 348–9].[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Keenan RJ, Landreneau RJ, Maley Jr RH, Singh D, Macherey R, Bartley S, Santucci T. Segmental resection spares pulmonary function in patients with stage I lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78(1):228-233.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Koike T, Yamato Y, Yoshiya K, Shimoyama T, Suzuki R. Intentional limited pulmonary resection for peripheral T1 N0 M0 small-sized lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125(4):924-928.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Okada M, Yoshikawa K, Hatta T, Tsubota N. Is segmentectomy with lymph node assessment an alternative to lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer of 2cm or smaller?. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71(3):956-960.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Yano T, Yokoyama H, Yoshino I, Tayama K, Asoh H, Hata K, Ichinose Y. Results of a limited resection for compromised or poor-risk patients with clinical stage I non-small cell carcinoma of the lung. J Am Coll Surg 1995;181(1):33-37.[Medline]
20. Date H, Andou A, Shimizu N. The value of limited resection for ‘clinical’ stage I peripheral non-small cell lung cancer in poor-risk patients: comparison of limited resection and lobectomy by a computer-assisted matched study. Tumori 1994;80(6):422-426.[Medline]
21. Larsen KR, Svendsen UG, Milman N, Brenoe J, Petersen BN. Cardiopulmonary function at rest and during exercise after resection for bronchial carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64(4):960-964.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Takizawa T, Haga M, Yagi N, Terashima M, Uehara H, Yokoyama A, Kurita Y. Pulmonary function after segmentectomy for small peripheral carcinoma of the lung. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;118(3):536-541.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Korst RJ, Ginsberg RJ, Ailawadi M, Bains MS, Downey Jr RJ, Rusch VW, Stover D. Lobectomy improves ventilatory function in selected patients with severe COPD. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66(3):898-902.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Choong CK, Meyers BF, Battafarano RJ, Guthrie TJ, Davis GE, Patterson GA, Cooper JD. Lung cancer resection combined with lung volume reduction in patients with severe emphysema. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;127(5):1323-1331.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Edwards JG, Duthie DJR, Waller DA. Lobar volume reduction surgery: a method of increasing the lung cancer resection rate in patients with emphysema. Thorax 2001;56:791-795.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Brunelli, A. Charloux, C. T. Bolliger, G. Rocco, J-P. Sculier, G. Varela, M. Licker, M. K. Ferguson, C. Faivre-Finn, R. M. Huber, et al. ERS/ESTS clinical guidelines on fitness for radical therapy in lung cancer patients (surgery and chemo-radiotherapy) Eur. Respir. J., July 1, 2009; 34(1): 17 - 41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kilic, M. J. Schuchert, B. L. Pettiford, A. Pennathur, J. R. Landreneau, J. P. Landreneau, J. D. Luketich, and R. J. Landreneau Anatomic Segmentectomy for Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Elderly. Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2009; 87(6): 1662 - 1668. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Shapiro, T. S. Weiser, J. P. Wisnivesky, C. Chin, M. Arustamyan, and S. J. Swanson Thoracoscopic segmentectomy compares favorably with thoracoscopic lobectomy for patients with small stage I lung cancer. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2009; 137(6): 1388 - 1393. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Watanabe, S. Ohori, S. Nakashima, T. Mawatari, N. Inoue, Y. Kurimoto, and T. Higami Feasibility of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery segmentectomy for selected peripheral lung carcinomas Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2009; 35(5): 775 - 780. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Rami-Porta and M. Tsuboi Sublobar resection for lung cancer Eur. Respir. J., February 1, 2009; 33(2): 426 - 435. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. J.A. Haasbeek, S. Senan, E. F. Smit, M. A. Paul, B. J. Slotman, and F. J. Lagerwaard Critical Review of Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Oncologist, March 1, 2008; 13(3): 309 - 319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P.-K. Hsu, H.-C. Huang, C.-C. Hsieh, H.-S. Hsu, Y.-C. Wu, M.-H. Huang, and W.-H. Hsu Effect of Formalin Fixation on Tumor Size Determination in Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2007; 84(6): 1825 - 1829. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Z. Atkins, D. H. Harpole Jr, J. H. Mangum, E. M. Toloza, T. A. D'Amico, and W. R. Burfeind Jr Pulmonary Segmentectomy by Thoracotomy or Thoracoscopy: Reduced Hospital Length of Stay With a Minimally-Invasive Approach Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2007; 84(4): 1107 - 1113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Schuchert, B. L. Pettiford, S. Keeley, T. A. D'Amato, A. Kilic, J. Close, A. Pennathur, R. Santos, H. C. Fernando, J. R. Landreneau, et al. Anatomic Segmentectomy in the Treatment of Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2007; 84(3): 926 - 933. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. J. Scott, J. Howington, S. Feigenberg, B. Movsas, and K. Pisters Treatment of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Stage I and Stage II: ACCP Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (2nd Edition) Chest, September 1, 2007; 132(3_suppl): 234S - 242S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. E Martin-Ucar, K. R Fareed, A. Nakas, P. Vaughan, J. G Edwards, and D. A Waller Is the initial feasibility of lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer in severe heterogeneous emphysema justified by long-term survival? Thorax, July 1, 2007; 62(7): 577 - 580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. Sienel, C. Stremmel, A. Kirschbaum, L. Hinterberger, E. Stoelben, J. Hasse, and B. Passlick Frequency of local recurrence following segmentectomy of stage IA non-small cell lung cancer is influenced by segment localisation and width of resection margins -- implications for patient selection for segmentectomy Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., March 1, 2007; 31(3): 522 - 528. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Okada, T. Mimura, J. Ikegaki, H. Katoh, H. Itoh, and N. Tsubota A novel video-assisted anatomic segmentectomy technique: Selective segmental inflation via bronchofiberoptic jet followed by cautery cutting J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2007; 133(3): 753 - 758. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Okada, T. Koike, M. Higashiyama, Y. Yamato, K. Kodama, and N. Tsubota Radical sublobar resection for small-sized non small cell lung cancer: A multicenter study J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., October 1, 2006; 132(4): 769 - 775. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. C. Garzon, C. S.H. Ng, A. D.L. Sihoe, A. V. Manlulu, R. H.L. Wong, T. W. Lee, and A. P.C. Yim Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Pulmonary Resection for Lung Cancer in Patients with Poor Lung Function Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2006; 81(6): 1996 - 2003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Antonio E. Martin-Ucar Apostolos Nakas John E. Pilling David A. Waller Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Martin-Ucar, A. E. Articles by Waller, D. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Martin-Ucar, A. E. Articles by Waller, D. A. Related Collections Lung - cancer