Abstract
BACKGROUND: Repeat pulmonary resection is widely accepted in clinical practice. This study aimed to compare sublobar resection (segmentectomy or wedge resection) with lobectomy in the treatment of patients who underwent a second pulmonary resection. METHODS: This study retrospectively included patients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection for second pulmonary resection. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance selection bias. Clinicopathological features, perioperative and survival outcomes of lobectomy and sublobar resection were compared. RESULTS: A total of 308 patients who underwent second pulmonary resection were identified: 71 (23.1%) who underwent lobectomy and 237 (76.9%) who underwent sublobar resection. After PSM, 58 patients for each group were selected with well-balanced clinicopathological characteristics. In patients who underwent sublobar resection, significantly shorter chest tube duration (days) (median, 4 vs. 2, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (days) (median, 6 vs. 4, p < 0.001) were observed. There was no significant difference in overall survival between these two groups after the second and first surgery (p = 0.65, p = 0.98), respectively. Subgroup analysis according to the type of the first resection showed consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Sublobar resection may be considered as an alternative option for second pulmonary resection due to its perioperative advantages and similar survival outcomes compared with lobectomy.