Is wedge a dirty word? Demographic and facility-level variables associated with high-quality wedge resection.

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.

Intraoperative Versus Preoperative Diagnosis of Lung Cancer: Differences in Treatments and Patient Outcomes.

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.

Characteristics of High-Volume Lung Segmentectomy Hospitals: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Segmental resection continues to gain favor in the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, but there is limited data on outcomes as related to facility volume. The purpose of this study is to better define the relationship between segmentectomy outcomes, survival, and facility volume. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was completed using the National Cancer Database. Patients with stage I disease undergoing segmentectomy 2004 to 2015 were included. Facility volume was determined per year; facilities performing higher than the median number of segmental resections were deemed high-volume and retained that classification for the remainder of the study. Propensity-score matching was used to compare 5-year survival and outcomes. RESULTS: Six hundred eighty-one centers performing 2481 segmentectomies were included. High-volume centers had higher utilization of minimally invasive approaches and lower conversion rates. There was no difference in readmission or 30-day mortality, but 90-day mortality differed between groups (1.2% vs. 2.6%, P = .03). High-volume centers were more likely to sample lymph nodes (88.5% vs. 80.7%, P < .01), and patients were less likely to have positives margins (1.3% vs. 2.7%, P = .03). Patients were no more likely to be upstaged based on facility volume (4.6% vs. 3.3%, P = .21). Overall, 5-year survival was better for patients treated at high-volume centers in the full cohort (69.5% vs. 66.4%, P = .014) but in propensity score-matched analysis this survival difference became non-significant (68.0% vs. 67.9% (P = .172). CONCLUSION: Segmentectomy performed at high-volume centers is associated with more frequent use of minimally invasive approach, more frequent negative margins, and improved 90-day survival.