4.6 Article

Salvage Surgery After Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy for Initially Unresectable Lung Carcinoma

期刊

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
卷 108, 期 6, 页码 1664-1670

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.06.087

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Salvage surgery is used for resection of locoregionally recurrent or regrowing lesions after treatment for unresectable non-small cell lung cancer. It is also used to resect lesions that have regressed after treatment and that had not initially been indicated for resection. Relationships between salvage surgery, safety, and prognosis, however, have remained unclear. Methods. Between 2006 and 2017, 29 patients received salvage resection (median age, 60 years; 25 men and 4 women). Safety and prognosis were analyzed. Results. Tumor grade at the time of initial treatment was stage III or IV in 23 and 6 patients, respectively. Twenty-two patients received chemoradiotherapy (radiation, 40-66 Gy) and 7 received chemotherapy. Time from initial treatment to surgery ranged from 2 to 60 months. Segmentectomy, lobectomy, bilobectomy and pneumonectomy were performed in 1, 25, 2, and 1 patients, respectively. Combined resections were needed in 17 arterioplasties, 4 chest wall resections, and 1 great vessel resection. There was no 30-day postoperative mortality. Grade 3 or higher-grade postoperative complications (mostly cardiopulmonary) were observed in 11 patients. Five-year overall survival after initial treatment was 61%; after surgery it was 51%. Five-year relapse-free survival after surgery was 49%. On recurrent-free survival patients with clinical stage III at the initial treatment, pathologic stage 0-II, or a good response to initial treatment showed a favorable prognosis. Conclusions. Although cardiopulmonary complications can accompany salvage surgery, the procedure is generally safe. Survival outcome is encouraging, especially in cases with good response to initial treatment. (C) 2019 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据