Skip to main content

Comparison of early patient-reported outcomes between uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection for peripheral small-sized non-small-cell lung cancer



Analysis of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) offers valuable insights into distinguishing the effects of closely related medical procedures from the patient’s perspective. In this study we compared symptom burden in patients undergoing uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection for peripheral small-sized non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).


This study included patients with peripheral NSCLC from an ongoing longitudinal prospective cohort study (CN-PRO-Lung 3) who underwent segmentectomy or wedge resection with tumor diameter ≤ 2 cm and consolidation tumor ratio (CTR) ≤ 0.5. PROs data were collected using the Perioperative Symptom Assessment for Lung Surgery questionnaire pre-operatively, daily post-surgery up to the fourth hospitalization day, and weekly post-discharge up to the fourth week. Propensity score matching and a generalized estimation equation model were employed to compare symptom severity. In addition, short-term clinical outcomes were compared.


In total, data of 286 patients (82.4%) undergoing segmentectomy and 61 patients (17.6%) undergoing wedge resection were extracted from the cohort. No statistically significant differences were found in the proportion of moderate-to-severe symptoms and mean scores for pain, cough, shortness of breath, disturbed sleep, fatigue, drowsiness, and distress during the 4-day postoperative hospitalization or the 4-week post-discharge period before or after matching (all p > 0.05). Compared with segmentectomy, wedge resection showed better short-term clinical outcomes, including shorter operative time (p = 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding (p = 0.046), and lower total hospital costs (p = 0.002).


The study findings indicate that uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection exert similar early postoperative symptom burden in patients with peripheral NSCLC (tumor diameter ≤ 2 cm and CTR ≤ 0.5).

Clinical trial registration

Not applicable.

Peer Review reports


Lung cancer has the highest mortality rate among all malignant tumors worldwide [1], and surgical resection remains the gold standard for early-stage lung cancer. In the late 1990s, the advent of health screening and low-dose spiral computed tomography (CT) scanning led to the detection of an increasing number of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) with diameter ≤ 2 cm [2, 3]. Since then, some researchers argue that sublobar resection can yield survival outcomes comparable to those of lobectomy in the treatment of early-stage NSCLC [4, 5], and many studies have explored the optimal surgical procedure for early-stage lung cancer.

The JCOG0201 trial highlighted that imaging diagnosis specificity for non-invasive adenocarcinomas reached 98.7% for tumors ≤ 2 cm in long diameter with a ≤ 0.25 consolidation tumor ratio (CTR) [6]. Building upon these findings, the JCOG0804 study suggested that both wedge resection and segmentectomy can achieve radical cure [7]. Further research [8,9,10] has indicated that the pathological diagnosis of early lung cancer with nodules ≤ 2 cm in maximum diameter and CTR ≤ 0.5 typically show low invasiveness. The prognosis with wedge resection is not significantly different from that with lobectomy or segmentectomy. Sublobectomy is also recommended for these nodules according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines [11]. Despite this, most current studies on sublobar resection for early lung cancer have primarily concentrated on traditional clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications, overall survival, and disease-free survival [9, 12, 13]. These studies have consistently found that patients with early-stage NSCLC, especially those with predominantly ground-glass components, generally enjoy an excellent prognosis and tend to exhibit similar clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, traditional clinical outcomes fail to adequately consider the burden of postoperative symptoms [14]. In recent years, as an increasing emphasis has been placed on the “patient-centered” medical approach in clinical practice [15], there has been a growing focus on patients’ self-perception. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have gained prominence in the evaluation of the differences between procedures [14, 16]. PROs offer invaluable insights into patient’s health status and treatment effects, enabling the assessment of symptom burden and functional impairment resulting from similar procedures [17]. This information can assist clinicians in selecting the optimal surgical plan for clinical treatment.

Consequently, evaluating the differences in efficacy between segmentectomy and wedge resection through the evaluation of self-perception of patients after lung cancer surgery may yield fresh insights for clinical decision-making [18]. To the best of our knowledge, no study has yet compared the symptoms and functional status of patients who underwent segmentectomy and wedge resection. Notably, uniportal thoracoscopic surgery has a lighter symptom burden than multiportal thoracoscopic surgery, and has thus been adopted by an increasing number of centers around the world [19]. Therefore, only patients who underwent uniportal thoracoscopic surgery were included in this study. In accordance with previous research and the institutional context [20, 21], the median postoperative hospital stay was 4 days, and patients experienced a significant symptom burden from four days after surgery to one month after discharge. Consequently, this study focused on evaluating the severity of symptoms during this period.



Patients from an ongoing longitudinal prospective cohort study (CN-PRO-Lung 3) conducted in China between April 2021 and February 2023 were selected for analysis. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital (No. SCCHEC-02-2018-043) [22], and all patients provided informed consent to participate.

Based on the JCOG0804 and CALGB140503 trials, as well as existing sublobar resection studies [7, 8, 23], the following inclusion criteria were established for patients: (1) underwent uniportal thoracoscopic anatomical segmentectomy or wedge resection; (2) a pathological diagnosis of NSCLC was made; (3) the tumor was located in the outer third of the lung field on chest CT; and (4) tumors ≤ 2 cm in maximum diameter and CTR ≤ 0.5. Exclusion criteria included: (1) a history of thoracic surgery; (2) a history of neoadjuvant therapy; (3) intraoperative use of both wedge resection and segmentectomy simultaneously; (4) a history of other malignant tumors; and (5) preoperative suspected lymph node metastasis or distant metastasis. To ensure the accuracy of the data, all clinical data and PRO information for the patients were entered and double-checked by two different healthcare providers specializing in thoracic surgery, both of whom received training in uniform criteria before data entry.

Surgical procedures and postoperative care

Preoperative thin-section lung CT images served as references for both groups, with three-dimensional reconstructions being performed for a small number of patients. All surgical procedures were conducted under general anesthesia, with patients positioned in the lateral decubitus posture, receiving one-lung ventilation on the unaffected side. A surgical incision, approximately 4 cm in length, was made between the fourth or fifth intercostal space, along the anterior and midaxillary lines. The surgery involved the routine use of endoscopic staplers, an ultrasonic scalpel, a coagulation hook, a 30° thoracoscope, and a wound protector. Lesion resection was performed using a thoracoscopic stapler. In our center, wedge resection is performed based on the surgeon’s discretion if the extent of resection can reach 2 cm or larger than the tumor diameter and the tumor location is superficially palpable. Otherwise, segmentectomy is performed to ensure a safe surgical margin. As previously reported, segmentectomy included dissection and division of at least 1 major vascular structure (the segmental artery or vein), as well as the segmental bronchus [24]. After lesion excision, the pulmonary and mediastinal lymph nodes were dissected or sampled in most patients; however, in a small subset of patients with pure ground-glass nodules, only segmentectomy or wedge resection was performed without lymphadenectomy. Upon completing the procedure, a silicone chest tube (20–30 F) was inserted at the original incision site. In one patient, both a silicone chest tube and pigtail chest tube were placed. Intercostal nerve blocks were not administered to any of the patients. A small number of patients were administered hypnotics as needed before surgery, and almost none were administered hypnotics after surgery. Postoperatively, as needed, the patients were routinely administered analgesic pump for pain relief, as well as atomization for relieving cough and asthma; furthermore, they received standardized care such as expectoration care and thromboprophylaxis. ECG monitoring, oxygen saturation monitoring, and the use of urinary catheter were discontinued on the first postoperative day. Patients were appropriately ambulated after urinary catheter removal. Chest tubes were removed when no air leak, hemothorax, or chylothorax was observed, bedside radiographs showed satisfactory residual lung expansion, and the drainage volume was less than 200 mL/d. All patients were discharged after removal of chest tube.

Outcomes and measures

The severity of each patients’ symptom burden was assessed using the Chinese version of the Perioperative Symptom Assessment for Lung Surgery (PSA-Lung) [25, 26]. This scale was developed and validated in accordance with the recommended standard steps for the development of PRO scales by FDA [27] and was designed to assess the perioperative symptoms related to lung surgery. The scale has been validated to have good reliability and validity [25]. The PSA-Lung comprises seven symptom items (pain, cough, shortness of breath, disturbed sleep, fatigue, drowsiness, and distress) and two functional items (walking difficulty and activity limitation), scored on a scale of 0 to 10. Higher scores indicate a greater symptom burden. This scale reflects the patient’s condition over the past 24 h, featuring straightforward and easily understood content, with a minimal burden during completion, and suitability for frequent measurement of perioperative symptoms in patients undergoing lung surgery.

The proportion of patients with clinically meaningful moderate-to-severe symptoms was compared to evaluate the difference in symptom burden between the two groups. As per previous similar studies, symptoms rated as “moderate to severe” were defined as symptoms with scores ≥ 4 points [21, 28, 29]. Scores recorded on the original scale (0–10 points) were transformed into dichotomous variables (mild, moderate to severe). Furthermore, the mean score of the symptom scale (0–10 points) between the two groups was also compared. PROs data were collected using paper or electronic questionnaires completed by patients. The corresponding time points in these questionnaires were selected for analysis, including pre-surgery, daily assessments up to 4 days post-surgery, and weekly assessments up to 4 weeks after discharge.

The secondary objective aimed to compare short-term postoperative clinical outcomes, encompassing operative time, intraoperative bleeding, chest tube drainage time, length of postoperative hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications, and total hospital cost. Postoperative complications were assessed using the Clavien–Dindo classification [30], with complications recorded from the time of surgery until discharge. This study reported grade I or higher complications. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected, including age, sex, educational level, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification [31], comorbidity, percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1%), and percent predicted diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO%). Surgical conditions included nodule diameter, lymphadenectomy, nodule location, number of chest tubes, nodule histology, and pathological stage of the nodule. Lung cancer staging adhered to the eighth edition of the tumor-node-metastasis (Node) staging [32].

Statistical analysis

Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 26.0 statistical software. Symptom scores, both pre-surgery and daily up to the fourth day of hospitalization, and then weekly up to the fourth week after discharge, were analyzed for both groups. Descriptive statistics were employed to summarize demographic and clinical characteristics, surgical conditions, and baseline data of the preoperative PROs for both groups. Categorical variables were compared using either the chi-squared test or the two-tailed Fisher’s exact test. Continuous variables were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Continuous variables that followed a normal distribution were assessed using Student ‘s t-test, while those that did not were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. To mitigate selection bias between the two groups, propensity score matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio using SPSS 26.0. Each patient’s propensity score was calculated using a logistic regression model adjusted for covariates, including age, sex, educational level, BMI, smoking status, ASA-PS classification, comorbidity, FEV1%, DLCOSB%, nodule diameter, lymphadenectomy, nodule location, number of chest tubes, nodule histology, and nodule pathological stage. The caliper was set to 0.02. To compare the proportion of patients who experienced a moderate-to-severe symptom burden over time between the two surgical groups, a generalized estimating equation model with a logistic link function and a binomial distribution was employed. Furthermore, the mean scores of patients’ symptom burden was also compared between the two groups using a generalized estimating equation model.

All tests were two-sided, and a significance level of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


Patients’ demographics and clinicopathological characteristics

Figure 1 presents a flowchart illustrating the patient selection process. Among the 1,901 patients who participated in the longitudinal CN-PRO-Lung 3 study conducted from April 2021 to February 2023, 347 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Among them, 286 underwent segmentectomy (82.4%), while 61 opted for wedge resection (17.6%). The median age of patients in both groups was 49.5 years, reflecting a relatively young population. The majority of patients were female (73.8%) and nonsmokers (84.9%), as detailed in Table 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram showing patient selection

Table 1 Demographic and clinical characteristics of the participants

Before conducting propensity score matching, there were no discernible differences between the groups in terms of age, sex, educational level, BMI, smoking status, ASA-PS classification, comorbidity, FEV1%, or DLCO%. In terms of surgical procedures, lymph node dissection was performed in the vast majority of patients with segmentectomy (97.2%), whereas the proportion of patients undergoing lymph node dissection during wedge resection decreased significantly (78.7%). Although there was a slight discrepancy in nodule diameter, with the wedge resection group having slightly smaller pulmonary nodules (median nodule diameter, 0.8 cm) than did the segmentectomy group (median nodule diameter, 0.9 cm), this difference did not reach statistical significance. Pathological staging indicated that the majority of patients in both groups were in the early stages of lung cancer, predominantly categorized as stages IA1 and IA2. The detailed intraoperative conditions are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Nodule and operative characteristics before and after matching

Following propensity score-matching, each group consisted of 49 patients. Owing to the low number of cases with two chest tubes and non-adenocarcinoma pathological types, neither group had any cases in these categories after propensity score assignment. Post-matching, the proportion of patients who underwent lymph node dissection was well-balanced between the two groups, with this procedure being performed in 46 patients (93.9%) across both groups. No statistically significant differences were identified in the demographic and clinical characteristics or intraoperative conditions between the two groups after matching.

Patient-reported symptoms

Before conducting propensity score matching, the majority of the 347 patients had completed preoperative baseline PSA-lung data, with a completion rate of 98.6%. However, the completion rates for PSA-Lung at 4 days after the operation and 4 weeks after discharge ranged from 63.8 to 90.2% and 63.4–74.1%, respectively (Data presented in a table: Additional File 1). Evaluation of the seven symptoms within PSA-Lung (pain, cough, shortness of breath, disturbed sleep, fatigue, drowsiness, and distress) revealed no differences in the proportion of moderate-to-severe symptoms and mean scores when comparing baseline data (Additional File 2, Additional File 3). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the proportion of moderate-to-severe scores for the seven symptoms: pain (p = 0.887), cough (p = 0.254), shortness of breath (p = 0.929), disturbed sleep (p = 0.372), fatigue (p = 0.695), drowsiness (p = 0.692), and distress (p = 0.201) between days 1 and 4 of postoperative hospitalization and weeks 1 to 4 after discharge. Moreover, the mean scores of the seven symptoms were not significantly different between the two groups (Additional File 4).

After propensity score matching, the PSA-Lung completion rates for the 98 patients were 99.9%, 68.8–90.8%, and 58.2–70.4% at preoperative baseline, 4 days postoperative hospitalization, and 4 weeks after discharge, respectively, data presented in a table (Additional File 5). Among the seven symptoms analyzed, no differences emerged between the groups with regard to the proportion of moderate-to-severe symptoms and mean scores when comparing baseline data (Additional File 6, Additional File 7). Likewise, no significant between-group differences were observed for the proportion of moderate-to-severe scores related to pain (p = 0.689), cough (p = 0.286), shortness of breath (p = 0.752), disturbed sleep (p = 0.731), fatigue (p = 0.226), drowsiness (p = 0.688), and distress (p = 0.398) during the period encompassing 4 days of postoperative hospitalization and 4 weeks after discharge (Fig. 2). Figure 2 depicts the difference in the proportion of moderate-to-severe symptoms between the four time points including disturbed sleep, fatigue, and drowsiness on the third day after surgery, and cough during the second week after discharge. Hence, a Chi-square analysis was performed separately for symptoms at these four time points; the analysis revealed that disturbed sleep (p = 0.069) on postoperative day 3, fatigue (p = 0.051) on postoperative day 3, and cough during second week after discharge (p = 0.100) were not statistically significant. Only drowsiness (p < 0.05) was significantly different on the third postoperative day. In addition, no differences were found between the groups with regard to the mean scores of the seven symptoms after matching. Data is presented in a table (Additional File 8).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Proportion of patients with moderate to severe symptoms after propensity score matching

POD, Postoperative day; PDW, Post-discharge week

Short-term clinical outcomes

Before conducting propensity score matching, wedge resection was associated with better perioperative outcomes than segmentectomy, including a shorter operative time (p = 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding (p < 0.001), and lower total hospital costs (p < 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed in chest tube drainage time (p = 0.706), median postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.996), or the incidence of postoperative complications (p = 0.377) between the two groups (Table 3).

Table 3 Traditional clinical outcomes

Following propensity score matching analysis, similar results were obtained. Significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of median operation time (p < 0.001), intraoperative bleeding (p = 0.046), and total hospital cost (p = 0.002). However, no significant differences were found between groups in the chest tube drainage time (p = 0.454), median postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.762), or incidence of postoperative complications (p = 0.475).


To the best of our knowledge, no studies have yet reported on the symptom burden following uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection for early NSCLC. In this study, the symptom burden of patients who underwent segmentectomy and wedge resection showed similar results based on PROs during the 1–4 days of postoperative hospitalization or 1–4 weeks after discharge. No significant differences were found between the two groups even after propensity score matching. In traditional clinical outcomes, patients who underwent wedge resection showed better perioperative outcomes, including shorter operative time, reduced intraoperative bleeding, and lower total hospital costs, both before and after matching.

In a previous study, we presented the PROs for thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy in early lung cancer cases, [21] where both procedures exhibited similar early symptom burden and functional impairments. This study extends our previous research by delving into the disparity between segmentectomy and wedge resection using PRO data in patients with early-stage lung cancer, addressing an existing research gap. By comparing the pros and cons of these two procedures in terms of PROs, we contribute further evidence to support clinical decision-making. Importantly, no significant differences in PROs were identified between the two procedures in this study.

Postoperative pain in patients primarily stemmed from the chest wall incision [33]. All patients in this study underwent uniportal thoracoscopy with a single incision, with relatively standardized dimensions (approximately 4 cm) and location (between the fourth and fifth intercostal spaces, along the anterior axillary line to the midaxillary line), suggesting that postoperative pain resulting from segmentectomy and wedge resection may be comparable. Regarding cough, the proportion of patients with moderate-to-severe cough was higher after segmentectomy than after wedge resection at most time points, as shown by the line graphs. This discrepancy may be attributed to the more frequent manipulation of lung tissue during segmentectomy, along with the duration of endotracheal intubation during surgery. While cough symptoms were more pronounced in patients undergoing segmentectomy, the difference did not reach statistical significance. An extended follow-up period may be necessary to elucidate potential variations between the two groups. In terms of shortness of breath, neither group showed a large difference, suggesting that both segmentectomy and sublobar resections result in minimal damage to lung parenchyma. Furthermore, patients in both groups were younger and displayed robust pulmonary function compensation, which may explain why shortness of breath may not differ significantly between the groups. Previous studies have indicated that pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, and distress form a symptom cluster [34] following lung cancer surgery, with these symptoms often interacting with one another [35]. Sleep quality, for example, can be significantly impacted by postoperative pain [36]. When sleep quality decreases, patients experience increased fatigue and drowsiness, subsequently affecting their mental well-being and leading to distress [37]. It is possible that the absence of significant differences in pain between the two groups contributed to the similarity in the effects of pain-related symptoms between them. Additionally, distress is employed to describe the psychological status of patients with lung cancer [38]. Patients were well-informed during preoperative discussions that the vast majority of peripheral lung cancers ≤ 2 cm in diameter and ≤ 0.5 in CTR were early-stage and clinically curable, with essentially no need for subsequent treatment. Thus, the psychological burden of patients was relatively light and similar between the two groups. Overall, it is plausible that the minimally invasive uniportal thoracoscopic technique itself substantially reduces the burden of postoperative symptoms in patients [19]. Consequently, small differences between various sublobectomy procedures may not be statistically discernible.

Notably, drowsiness on the third postoperative day was statistically significantly different between the two groups. It indicates that the symptom burden of drowsiness on the third postoperative day in patients undergoing wedge resection is heavier than that in segmentectomy; however, this is difficult to clinically explain. This could have possibly been a chance error owing to the small sample size. Hence, we performed a separate chi-square analysis for each time point of the seven symptoms after matching, with a total of 56 chi-square analyses, which revealed a significant difference only in the drowsiness on the third postoperative day, and we considered one chance error acceptable. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference between the two groups in the overall analysis of the drowsiness longitudinal data. It is necessary to conduct future studies with larger sample size to verify whether the longitudinal data is consistent with the symptom burden at a certain point in time.

Pulmonary segments constitute independent anatomical structures and functional units [39], with each segment possessing its own lymphatic drainage, segmental bronchi, arteries, and veins. A substantial number of patients exhibit vascular and bronchial variations [40, 41], resulting in prolonged operation times when accurately locating the target lung segment, vessels, and bronchi. Segmentectomy requires adequate mobilization of the deep vessels and bronchi, leading to increased damage to surrounding tissues and, consequently, elevated intraoperative bleeding [42]. Notably, the amount of bleeding was small in both procedures, and although segmentectomy had a statistically significantly greater amount of bleeding than wedge resection, the actual clinical significance of this difference may be small. Moreover, segmentectomy presents more technical challenges compared to wedge resection, requiring more stapler reloads and hemostatic materials during surgery. Consequently, the overall hospitalization cost associated with segmentectomy is higher than that associated with wedge resection. Nevertheless, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of chest tube drainage time, duration of postoperative hospital stay, or the incidence of postoperative complications. These findings suggest that wedge resection is as safe as segmentectomy in terms of short-term prognosis, and may constitute a secure and feasible surgical approach for early lung cancer with low metastasis risk. This finding aligns with that previously reported [9, 12, 13].

Compared to previous reports, our study has several strengths. First, our research was patient-centered, relying on PROs for more sensitive data that can uncover direct differences between the two surgical modalities [17, 19]. This approach compensates for traditional data limitations. Second, we transformed the 0–10 scores recorded on the form into dichotomous variables (mild and moderate to severe), and compared different proportions of patients with moderate-to-severe symptoms between groups, which may achieve clinical significance [19]. Third, we employed PSA-Lung, a concise and relatively unburdensome tool for patients, for longitudinal measurements at multiple timepoints post-surgery, thereby reflecting patient status. In previous studies, assessments of time points were limited and the intervals were long, leading to the inadvertent omission of postoperative PRO data [43, 44].

Nevertheless, our study has some limitations that should be mentioned. Firstly, this was an observational study; hence, several confounding factors were introduced. Despite employing propensity score matching based on baseline data, potential patient-related biases may not have been entirely eliminated. Further validation through RCTs is required in the future. Second, the patients in our study were predominantly young women and non-smokers, which represents the characteristic lung cancer population in our region [45] and may not be a true representation of the European and American populations [1, 46]. To enhance the generalizability of our results, future studies should validate our findings in different regions, populations, and multi-institutional settings. Third, the relatively small sample size in our study may not fully capture symptom burden and trends among the target group, potentially rendering the observed differences or associations statistically insignificant. As such, increasing the cohort size in future research could improve sample representativeness and result stability. Fourth, we did not statistically analyze the postoperative care and medication of wedge resection versus segmentectomy to investigate the impact on symptoms, although we administered standardized postoperative care and conventional medication. It is necessary to take these factors into account in future study designs.


The results of this study revealed that uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection exhibited comparable early postoperative symptom burden for patients with peripheral NSCLC nodules ≤ 2 cm in diameter and CTR ≤ 0.5, while wedge resection demonstrated superior short-term clinical outcomes in comparison to segmentectomy. These study outcomes support the utilization of wedge resection in this specific patient cohort.

Data availability

De-identified participant data are available on reasonable request to the corresponding author starting from 6 months after this study is published.



patient-reported outcomes


non-small cell lung cancer


computed tomography


consolidation tumor ratio


National Comprehensive Cancer Network


American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status


percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s


percentage of predicted diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide


Perioperative Symptom Assessment for Lung Surgery


  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kodama K, Higashiyama M, Yokouchi H, Takami K, Kuriyama K, Mano M, et al. Prognostic value of ground-glass opacity found in small lung adenocarcinoma on high-resolution CT scanning. Lung Cancer. 2001;33:17–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sone S, Takashima S, Li F, Yang Z, Honda T, Maruyama Y, et al. Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet. 1998;351:1242–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shennib H. Sublobar resection for lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999;16(Suppl 1):S61–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kodama K, Doi O, Higashiyama M, Yokouchi H. Intentional limited resection for selected patients with T1 N0 M0 non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-institution study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1997;114:347–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Suzuki K, Koike T, Asakawa T, Kusumoto M, Asamura H, Nagai K, et al. A prospective radiological study of thin-section computed tomography to predict pathological noninvasiveness in peripheral clinical IA lung cancer (Japan Clinical Oncology Group 0201). J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:751–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Suzuki K, Watanabe SI, Wakabayashi M, et al. A single-arm study of sublobar resection for ground-glass opacity dominant peripheral lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;163:289–e3012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhang C, Pan Y, Li H, Zhang Y, Li B, Zhang Y, et al. Extent of surgical resection for radiologically subsolid T1N0 invasive lung adenocarcinoma: when is a wedge resection acceptable? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023;27.

  9. Chiang XH, Lu TP, Hsieh MS, Tsai TM, Liao HC, Kao TN, et al. Thoracoscopic wedge resection versus segmentectomy for cT1N0 lung adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:8398–411.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tsutani Y, Miyata Y, Nakayama H, Okumura S, Adachi S, Yoshimura M, et al. Appropriate sublobar resection choice for ground glass opacity-dominant clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma: wedge resection or segmentectomy. Chest. 2014;145:66–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aisner DL, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer. Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Ne. 2022;20:497–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Altorki NK, Kamel MK, Narula N, Ghaly G, Nasar A, Rahouma M, et al. Anatomical segmentectomy and wedge resections are associated with comparable outcomes for patients with small cT1N0 non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11:1984–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bachman KC, Worrell SG, Linden PA, Gray KE, Argote-Greene LM, Towe CW. Wedge resection offers similar survival to segmentectomy for typical carcinoid tumors. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022;34:293–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang L, Yu H, Dai W, Yang X, Wei X, Wang XS, Cleeland CS, Li Q, Shi Q (2023) Symptom trajectories informing patient care after lung cancer surgery: a longitudinal patient-reported outcome study. Ann Surg Oncol 30(5):2607–2617.

  15. Miranda LS, Datta S, Melzer AC, Wiener RS, Davis JM, Tong BC, et al. Rationale and design of the lung cancer screening implementation. Evaluation of patient-centered care study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:1581–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Medbery RL, Fernandez FG, Khullar OV. Patient-reported outcomes: time to integrate into outcomes reporting? Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;31:856–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pezold ML, Pusic AL, Cohen WA, Hollenberg JP, Butt Z, Flum DR, et al. Defining a research agenda for patient-reported outcomes in surgery: using a Delphi survey of stakeholders. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:930–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Wei X, Liu Y, Yu H, Dai W, Yang D, Zhang K, Sun J, Xu W, Gong R, Yu Q, Pu Y (2022) Protocol of an iterative qualitative study to develop a molecular testing decision aid for shared decision-making in patients with lung cancer after surgery. BMJ Open 12(9):e061367.

  19. Dai W, Dai Z, Wei X, Pompili C, Shi QL, Xie TP, et al. Early patient-reported outcomes after uniportal vs multiportal thoracoscopic lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2022;114:1229–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fagundes CP, Shi Q, Vaporciyan AA, Rice DC, Popat KU, Cleeland CS, et al. Symptom recovery after thoracic surgery: measuring patient-reported outcomes with the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150:613–e92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Dai W, Chang S, Pompili C, Qiu B, Wei X, Mu Y, et al. Early postoperative patient-reported outcomes after thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus lobectomy for small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29:547–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chinese clinical trial registry. Registration number: ChiCTR2000033016 Approval No. of ethic committee: SCCHEC-02-2018-043.

  23. Altorki NK, Wang X, Wigle D, Gu L, Darling G, Ashrafi AS, et al. Perioperative mortality and morbidity after sublobar versus lobar resection for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: post-hoc analysis of an international, randomised, phase 3 trial (CALGB/Alliance 140503). Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6:915–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Weiss KD, Deeb AL, Wee JO, Swanson SJ, Bueno R, Jaklitsch MT, et al. When a segmentectomy is not a segmentectomy: quality assurance audit and evaluation of required elements for an anatomic segmentectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023;165:1919–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bello UM, Chutiyami M, Salihu D, Abdu SI, Tafida BA, Jabbo AA et al. 28th Annual Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Research. Quality of life of stroke survivors in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Qual Life Res. 2021;30:1–19.

  26. Yang D, Hong Q, Zhao C, Mu J. Postoperative patient-reported outcomes after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery using the perioperative symptom assessment for lung surgery scale. Curr Oncol. 2022;29:7645–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Swarm RA, Paice JA, Anghelescu DL, Are M, Bruce JY, Buga S, et al. Adult cancer pain. Version 3.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019;17:977–1007.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Shi Q, Mendoza TR, Dueck AC, Ma H, Zhang J, Qian Y, et al. Determination of mild, moderate, and severe pain interference in patients with cancer. Pain. 2017;158:1108–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Sankar A, Johnson SR, Beattie WS, Tait G, Wijeysundera DN. Reliability of the American Society of anesthesiologists physical status scale in clinical practice. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113:424–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Detterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Kim AW, Tanoue LT. The Eighth Edition Lung cancer stage classification. Chest. 2017;151:193–203. 8th ed.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jutley RS, Khalil MW, Rocco G. Uniportal vs standard three-port VATS technique for spontaneous pneumothorax: comparison of post-operative pain and residual paraesthesia. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005;28:43–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lin S, Chen Y, Yang L, Zhou J. Pain, fatigue, disturbed sleep and distress comprised a symptom cluster that related to quality of life and functional status of lung cancer surgery patients. J Clin Nurs. 2013;22:1281–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wei X, Yu H, Dai W, Xu W, Yu Q, Pu Y, et al. Discrepancy in the perception of symptoms among patients and healthcare providers after lung cancer surgery. Support Care Cancer. 2022;30:1169–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chouchou F, Khoury S, Chauny JM, Denis R, Lavigne GJ. Postoperative sleep disruptions: a potential catalyst of acute pain? Sleep Med Rev. 2014;18:273–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Luciani A, Jacobsen PB, Extermann M, Foa P, Marussi D, Overcash JA, et al. Fatigue and functional dependence in older cancer patients. Am J Clin Oncol. 2008;31:424–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Riba MB, Donovan KA, Andersen B, et al. Distress management. Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Ne. 2019;17:1229–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ugalde P, Camargo J, Deslauriers J. Lobes, fissures, and bronchopulmonary segments. Thorac Surg Clin. 2007;17:587–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Gao C, Xu WZ, Li ZH, Chen L. Analysis of bronchial and vascular patterns in left upper lobes to explore the genesis of mediastinal lingular artery and its influence on pulmonary anatomical variation. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;16:306.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Chassagnon G, Morel B, Carpentier E, Le Ducou H, Sirinelli D. Tracheobronchial branching abnormalities: lobe-based classification scheme. Radiographics. 2016;36:358–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ijsseldijk MA, Shoni M, Siegert C, Seegers J, van Engelenburg AKC, Tsai TC, et al. Oncological outcomes of lobar resection, segmentectomy, and wedge resection for T1a non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;32:582–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Xu GW, Xie MR, Wu HR, Xiong R, Li CW, Xu SB, et al. A prospective study examining the impact of uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery on the short-term quality of life in patients with lung cancer. Thorac Cancer. 2020;11:612–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Stamatis G, Leschber G, Schwarz B, Brintrup DL, Ose C, Weinreich G, et al. Perioperative course and quality of life in a prospective randomized multicenter phase III trial, comparing standard lobectomy versus anatomical segmentectomy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer up to 2 cm, stage IA (7th edition of TNM staging system). Lung Cancer. 2019;138:19–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Chinese Expert Group on Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Lung CancerChina Lung Oncology Group. China national lung cancer screening guideline with low-dose computed tomography; 2023 version. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi. 2023;26:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Yang D, Liu Y, Bai C, Wang X, Powell CA. Epidemiology of lung cancer and lung cancer screening programs in China and the United States. Cancer Lett. 2020;468:82–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors thank Editage ( for English language editing. The authors thank Xin Nie for his statistical consultation.


This work was supported by the Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2023YFH0075] and Sichuan Province Key Clinical Specialty Construction Project [no grant number].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



All authors have made significant contributions to the study, including the study concept and design; acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; critical revision of the article for important intellectual content; and final approval of the version to be published. Specifically, drafting of the article was performed by YZ Z; statistical analysis was performed by KX Z, HQ Z, C L and HF Y; funding was obtained by W D, Q L, and QL S; administrative, technical, or material support was provided by WW L and X G; and study supervision was conducted by TP X, W D, and X W.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianpeng Xie.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan Cancer Hospital (No. SCCHEC-02-2018-043). All patients provided informed consent for inclusion in this study. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, Y., Liu, W., Gao, X. et al. Comparison of early patient-reported outcomes between uniportal thoracoscopic segmentectomy and wedge resection for peripheral small-sized non-small-cell lung cancer. J Cardiothorac Surg 19, 215 (2024).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: