Outcomes After Sleeve Lung Resections Versus Pneumonectomy in the United States

Background The current national trends, practice patterns, and outcomes after sleeve resection compared with pneumonectomy in the United States are not known. In addition, whether hospital sleeve-to-pneumonectomy (S:P) ratios are a valid marker of hospital quality is unclear. We describe practice patterns and evaluate the utility of the S:P ratio. Methods We identified all patients (N = 23,964) undergoing sleeve resection (n = 1,713) or pneumonectomy (n = 22,251) in the National Cancer Data Base between 1998 and 2012 at 644 hospitals. We used propensity score matching to compare short-term outcomes and overall survival between pneumonectomy and sleeve resection. We grouped hospitals into S:P ratio quintiles and used multilevel modeling to analyze hospital-level outcomes. Results There has been a 1% yearly increase in sleeve resection rates, with wide variation in hospital S:P ratios (middle quintile, 1:12; range, 1:38 to 1:3). After propensity score matching, differences in age, clinical T and N stage, and the incidence of main bronchus tumors were negligible among other variables. Sleeve resections were associated with lower 30-day (1.6% vs 5.9%; p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (4% vs 9.4%; p < 0.001) and improved overall survival. Hospitals with higher S:P ratios were not associated with better risk-adjusted 30-day (7.2% vs 7.4%; p = 0.244) or 90-day mortality (11.9% vs 12.2%; p = 0.308) or same-hospital readmission rates (3.7% vs 4.3%; p = 0.523). Conclusions Compared with pneumonectomy, sleeve resections are associated with improved short-term outcomes and improved overall survival. However, hospital S:P ratios were not associated with better risk-adjusted outcomes and thus may not be a valid quality measure.