Abstract:We thank Cao et al. [1] for their insightful comments on our manuscript recently published in the European Journal of CardioThoracic Surgery [2]. Cao et al. addressed, in their letter to the editor, two important and controversial aspects of segmentectomy comparing with lobectomy for early stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which we would like to discuss in detail. The first issue emphasized by Cao et al. was the rationality of using combined overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) outcomes to compare the two different surgical procedures. Our study aimed at assessing the survival difference between segmentectomy and lobectomy. We must admit that combining OS and CSS does have some shortcomings such as it may overestimate the adverse survival outcomes of segmentectomy procedures just as Cao et al. pointed out. However, the data we based our study on were divergent, with few providing CSS, whereas most of the published studies use OS to assess the two procedures. The overestimation exists in each published study which selected the patients with limited cardiopulmonary function as candidates for segmentectomy; it is inevitable for us to avoid such overestimation. Besides, a previously published paper also used combined OS and CSS to assess oncological outcomes [3]. It is insufficient to conduct meta-analysis for the comparison of segmentectomy and lobectomy exclusively based on either OS or CSS data and it would be possible in future to conduct such a meta-analysis with subgroups of OS and CSS as new suitable data are published. The other issue proposed by Cao et al. is to differentiate the intentional segmentectomy from the compromised one; recently, several studies also excluded compromised segmentectomy and aimed to compare intentional segmentectomy with lobectomy [4, 5]. Some studies, such as Tsutani et al. [6], reported the use of propensity score analysis. We agree with Cao et al. that these studies would be the future direction. However, as the data are insufficient, it is still meaningful to estimate the oncological effects of segmentectomy including both compromised and intentional procedures. We are also undertaking a prospective study aimed at selecting the optimal candidates for intentional segmentectomy. The issue that segmentectomy, especially the intentional one, or lobectomy, which is suitable for early stage NSCLC, would be long-existing until the future randomized controlled trials such as CALGB 140503 and JCOG 0802. We are grateful to Cao et al. [1] for their kind and insightful comments, and we thank them for taking the time to remark on our work.

Is it Unjustified to Perform Segmentectomy in Surgical Treatment of Lung Adenocarcinoma?

Segmentectomy or lobectomy for early stage lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Survival Following Segmentectomy or Wedge Resection in Early-Stage Lung Invasive Adenocarcinoma or Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Comparison of Outcomes Following Segmentectomy or Lobectomy for Patients with Clinical N0 Invasive Lung Adenocarcinoma of 2 Cm or Less in Diameter

Comparative Analysis of the Long-Term Outcomes of Segmentectomy and Lobectomy for Stage IA1 Lung Adenocarcinoma in Patients with or Without Previous Malignancy of Other Organs: a Population-Based Study

European multicentre study evaluating the prognosis of peripheral early-stage lung adenocarcinoma patients operated on by segmentectomy or lobectomy

Survival Rates after Lobectomy, Segmentectomy, and Wedge Resection for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Comparative Study of the Anatomic Segmentectomy Versus Lobectomy for Clinical Stage I-A Peripheral Lung Cancer by Video Assistant Thoracoscopic Surgery

Survival and Long-Term Cause-Specific Mortality Associated with Stage IA Lung Adenocarcinoma after Wedge Resection Vs. Segmentectomy: A Population-Based Propensity Score Matching and Competing Risk Analysis

Efficacy of thoracoscopic segmentectomy versus lobectomy in the treatment of early invasive lung adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matching study

Thirty-day outcomes after lobectomy or segmentectomy for lung cancer surgery

Reply to Cao Et Al.

Early Outcomes of Robotic Versus Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Comparative analysis of the clinical effects of different thoracoscopic resection in the treatment of Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Novel Perspective to Evaluate the Safety of Segmentectomy: Clinical Significance of Lobar and Segmental Lymph Node Metastasis in Ct1n0m0 Lung Adenocarcinoma†

Segmentectomy versus Lobectomy in the United States

Survival Following Segmentectomy or Lobectomy in Elderly Patients with Early-Stage Lung Cancer

A Retrospective Study of Effectiveness of Thoracoscopic Lobectomy and Segmentectomy in Patients with Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Early Postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes After Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy Versus Lobectomy for Small-Sized Peripheral Non-small-cell Lung Cancer

Sublobar Resection Is Associated With Better Perioperative Outcomes In Elderly Patients With Clinical Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Longitudinal Patient-Reported Outcomes 1 Year after Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy Versus Lobectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: a Multicentre, Prospective Cohort Study Protocol.