RESUMO
Background: Surgical resection is the primary treatment for early-stage lung cancer, but little is known about the outcomes that truly matter to patients. This aim of our study was to identify the aspects of postoperative outcomes that matter most to patients undergoing lung cancer surgery and explore the influence of clinical and demographic factors on their importance ratings. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of patients undergoing lung resection for non-small cell lung cancer at our institution from November 2021 to May 2022. Patients were surveyed using a self-developed questionnaire and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core health-related quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) prior to surgery. Ordinal logistic regression was performed to determine associations between individual patient factors and outcome importance ratings. Results: Forty patients completed the survey during the study period. Patients prioritized oncologic outcomes, with 95% rating R0 resection and cancer recurrence as "very important". Other important factors included overall survival (90%), postoperative complications (e.g., myocardial infarction: 92.5%, infection: 87.5%), and the need for reoperation (82.5%). Health-related quality of life factors, such as chronic pain (77.5%) and the ability to return to normal physical and exercise levels (75%), were also highly valued. Certain patient clinical and demographic factors demonstrated significant associations with importance placed on certain outcomes. Preoperative health-related quality of life scores did not influence outcome importance ratings. Conclusions: This study provides insights into the outcomes that matter most to patients undergoing lung cancer surgery. Oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications were prioritized, while scar-related factors were less important. Patient preferences varied based on demographic and clinical factors. Understanding these preferences can enhance shared decision-making and improve patient-centered care in thoracic surgical oncology.
RESUMO
Objective: Surgical mortality has traditionally been assessed at arbitrary intervals out to 1 year, without an agreed optimum time point. The aim of our study was to investigate the time-varying risk of death after lobectomy to determine the optimum period to evaluate surgical mortality rate after lobectomy for lung cancer. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients undergoing lobectomy for lung cancer at our institution from 2015 to 2022. Parametric survival models were assessed and compared with a nonparametric kernel estimate. The hazard function was plotted over time according to the best-fit statistical distribution. The time points at which instantaneous hazard rate peaked and stabilized in the 1-year period after surgery were then determined. Results: During the study period, 2284 patients underwent lobectomy for lung cancer. Cumulative mortality at 30, 90, and 180 days was 1.3%, 2.9%, and 4.9%, respectively. Log-logistic distribution showed the best fit compared with other statistical distribution, indicated by the lowest Akaike information criteria value. The instantaneous hazard rate was greatest during the immediate postoperative period (0.129; 95% confidence interval, 0.087-0.183) and diminishes rapidly within the first 30 days after surgery. Instantaneous hazard rate continued to decrease past 90 days and stabilized only at approximately 180 days. Conclusions: In-hospital mortality is the optimal follow-up period that captures the early-phase hazard during the immediate postoperative period after lobectomy. Thirty-day mortality is not synonymous to "early mortality," as instantaneous hazard rate remains elevated well past the 90-day time point and only stabilizes at approximately 180 days after lobectomy.
