ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
Comparison of oncological outcomes between wedge resection and segmentectomy for T1a/bN0M0 non-small-cell lung cancer: a population-based retrospective cohort study.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A structural dose-response relationship between lymph node yield and survival after anatomical segmentectomy for early-stage NSCLC: a SEER-based retrospective cohort study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- A novel maximum wall thickness (Tmax) category for cystic lung adenocarcinomas: a retrospective study focusing on pathological invasiveness and prognosis.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSublobar resection, including wedge resection (WR) and segmental resection (SR) has been considered for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the optimal sublobar approach continues to be a subject of extensive debate within the thoracic surgical community. This study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes of WR and SR in such patients.
methodsT1a/bN0M0 NSCLC patients who underwent WR or SR between 2000 and 2019 were retrospectively retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to establish a balanced cohort, and overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were statistically analyzed.
resultsA total of 4112 patients were included, with 3283 (79.8%) in the WR group and 829 (20.2%) in the SR group. Following 1:1 PSM, 764 patients in each group were further evaluated. The SR group exhibited significantly longer OS ( P < 0.001) and CSS ( P = 0.032) compared to the WR group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that SR was independently associated with improved survival outcomes ( P < 0.001, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.90 for OS; P = 0.036, HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99 for CSS). Additionally, variables such as sex, race, tumor grade, and histological type were identified as independent factors predictive of both OS and CSS. In subgroup analysis adjusted for all covariates, patients with tumors measuring 1-2 cm demonstrated a significant association between SR and improved OS and CSS.
conclusionSegmentectomy provided superior oncological outcomes for NSCLC ≤2 cm in the overall cohort, whereas there were no significant differences in OS and CSS between the two sublobar procedures for tumors of 0-1 cm. WR may be a reasonable option for 0-1 cm tumors in select cases, particularly for peripheral lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.