Quantifying the safety benefits of wedge resection: a society of thoracic surgery database propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND Wedge resection is often used instead of anatomic resection in an attempt to mitigate perioperative risk. In propensity-matched populations, we sought to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing wedge resection with those undergoing anatomic resection. METHODS The Society of Thoracic Surgery database was reviewed for stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing wedge resection and anatomic resection to analyze postoperative morbidity and mortality. Propensity scores were estimated using a logistic model adjusted for a variety of risk factors. Patients were then matched by propensity score using a greedy 5- to 1-digit matching algorithm, and compared using McNemar's test. RESULTS Between 2009 and 2011, 3,733 wedge resection and 3,733 anatomic resection patients were matched. The operative mortality was 1.21% for wedge resection versus 1.93% for anatomic resection (p=0.0118). Major morbidity occurred in 4.53% of wedge resection patients versus 8.97% of anatomic resection patients (p<0.0001). A reduction was noted in the incidence of pulmonary complications, but not cardiovascular or neurologic complications. There was a consistent reduction in major morbidity regardless of age, lung function, or type of incision. Mortality was reduced in patients with preoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second less than 85% predicted. CONCLUSIONS Wedge resection has a 37% lower mortality and 50% lower major morbidity rate than anatomic resection in these propensity-matched populations. The mortality benefit is most apparent in patients with forced expiratory volume in 1 second less than 85% predicted. These perioperative benefits must be carefully weighed against the increase in locoregional recurrence and possible decrease in long-term survival associated with the use of wedge resection for primary lung cancers.