Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, the impact of sublobar resection versus lobectomy on the prognosis of solid-dominant stage IA lung cancer is contradictory in different studies, which requires further exploration. METHODS: The authors analyzed 26 studies, including one randomized controlled trial and retrospective cohort studies. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effects or random-effects models based on heterogeneity levels. RESULTS: The analysis included 12 667 patients, with 3488 undergoing sublobar resections and 9179 receiving lobectomies. The overall analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) (HR=1.28, 95% CI: 0.98-1.69) between sublobar resection and lobectomy, but lobectomy was associated with better recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.10-1.75). Subgroup analyses revealed that, for tumors with a diameter ≤2 cm, sublobar resection versus lobectomy showed no significant difference in OS but sublobar resection had lower RFS. For 2-3 cm tumors, both OS and RFS were significantly lower in the sublobar resection group. When consolidation-to-tumor ratio (CTR) ranged from 0.5 to <1, OS did not differ significantly, but RFS was significantly lower in sublobar resection. Lung cancers with CTR=1 showed significantly lower OS and RFS in the sublobar resection group. Segmentectomy provided similar OS and RFS compared to lobectomy, while wedge resection had a detrimental effect on patient prognosis. However, wedge resection may have provided comparable outcomes for patients aged 75 years or older. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that segmentectomy and lobectomy yield similar oncological outcomes. However, compared to lobectomy, wedge resection is associated with a poorer prognosis. Nevertheless, for elderly patients, wedge resection is also a reasonable surgical option.