
==== Front
J Chest Surg
J Chest Surg
Journal of Chest Surgery
2765-1606
2765-1614
The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

39115197
10.5090/jcs.24.010
jcs-57-5-460
Clinical Research
Different DLCO Parameters as Predictors of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Mild Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients with Lung Cancer
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5093-1629
Kim Mil Hoo M.D.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9999-0782
Lee Joonseok M.D.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0704-6987
Son Joung Woo M.D.
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9211-0853
Shih Beatrice Chia-Hui M.D.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4980-3264
Jeong Woohyun M.D.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3582-3165
Jeon Jae Hyun M.D. 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6581-2750
Kim Kwhanmien M.D., Ph.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9366-5981
Jheon Sanghoon M.D., Ph.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9309-8865
Cho Sukki M.D., Ph.D. 12
1 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
2 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
Corresponding author Sukki Cho Tel 82-32-787-7132 Fax 82-32-787-4050 E-mail tubincho@snu.ac.kr ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9309-8865
†This study was presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul, South Korea, November 2–4, 2023.

5 9 2024
8 8 2024
8 8 2024
57 5 460466
24 1 2024
22 4 2024
7 5 2024
Copyright © 2024, The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background

Numerous studies have investigated methods of predicting postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in lung cancer surgery, with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and low forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) being recognized as risk factors. However, predicting complications in COPD patients with preserved FEV1 poses challenges. This study considered various diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) parameters as predictors of pulmonary complication risks in mild COPD patients undergoing lung resection.

Methods

From January 2011 to December 2019, 2,798 patients undergoing segmentectomy or lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were evaluated. Focusing on 709 mild COPD patients, excluding no COPD and moderate/severe cases, 3 models incorporating DLCO, predicted postoperative DLCO (ppoDLCO), and DLCO divided by the alveolar volume (DLCO/VA) were created for logistic regression. The Akaike information criterion and Bayes information criterion were analyzed to assess model fit, with lower values considered more consistent with actual data.

Results

Significantly higher proportions of men, current smokers, and patients who underwent an open approach were observed in the PPC group. In multivariable regression, male sex, an open approach, DLCO <80%, ppoDLCO <60%, and DLCO/VA <80% significantly influenced PPC occurrence. The model using DLCO/VA had the best fit.

Conclusion

Different DLCO parameters can predict PPCs in mild COPD patients after lung resection for NSCLC. The assessment of these factors using a multivariable logistic regression model suggested DLCO/VA as the most valuable predictor.

Pulmonary diffusing capacity
Postoperative complications
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Lung resection
Non-small cell lung carcinoma
Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Lung cancer remains leading cancer in terms of both incidence and mortality worldwide [1]. However, the increasing detection of early-stage lung cancer has led to improved survival rates, and surgical treatment has been established as the primary curative approach for these early-stage cases [2]. Patients with lung cancer often have comorbidities, including advanced age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diffuse interstitial lung disease, or inflammatory lung disease [3]. These comorbidities can result in a high incidence of postoperative complications, which complicates surgical treatment even for early-stage lung cancer. Therefore, it is crucial to assess the potential for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) following lung resection.

COPD is a common pulmonary condition, occurring in approximately 5% of lung cancer patients [4]. The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines recommend diagnosing COPD based on the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and the forced vital capacity (FVC). According to the most recent GOLD guidelines, COPD is diagnosed in patients with FEV1/FVC <0.7, and severity is classified based on predicted FEV1% [5]. Numerous studies have shown that poor FEV1 is associated with an increased frequency of PPCs. Consequently, risk stratification for PPCs is well-established in patients with moderate or severe COPD [6,7]. However, it remains unclear which mild COPD patients are at elevated risk for PPCs.

Numerous studies have shown the clinical efficacy of diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) and the predicted postoperative DLCO (ppoDLCO) in predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients with lung cancer [8,9]. There are 3 DLCO parameters in pulmonary function testing (PFT). First, DLCO represents the ability of the lung to diffuse carbon monoxide across its membranes. Second, ppoDLCO represents the predicted DLCO value after surgery. Third, DLCO/VA represents the DLCO divided by the alveolar volume (VA). Therefore, this study aimed to determine which DLCO value could best predict PPCs after lung resection for lung cancer.

Methods

Study population

This study initially evaluated 2,798 patients who underwent segmentectomy or lobectomy at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (SNUBH) due to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from January 2011 to December 2019. Institutional Review Board (IRB) of SNUBH approval was received (IRB approval no., B-2402-880-101). The requirement for informed consent was waived because of the retrospective study design. The choice of surgical approach, such as video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) or open thoracotomy, and the extent of lung resection were determined by the operating surgeon based on the patient’s clinical stage and condition. Patients who underwent PFT with DLCO within 1 month of surgery were selected for the study. All PFTs, including DLCO, were conducted at our institution, and all instruments were calibrated before each test. The COPD diagnosis followed the GOLD guidelines, with FEV1/FVC less than 0.7 diagnosed as having COPD. Severity was categorized based on FEV1, with FEV1 ≥80% classified as mild, 50%≤ FEV1 <80% as moderate, 30%≤ FEV1 <50% as severe COPD, and FEV1 <30% as very severe COPD [5]. For this study, patients with FEV1/FVC above 0.7 were excluded, resulting in the exclusion of 1,844 patients. Additionally, 246 patients with FEV1 <80%, including those with moderate and severe COPD, were excluded. Finally, 709 patients were included (Fig. 1).

Various DLco measurement definitions

DLCO is a test that, in simple terms, measures the lung’s ability to transfer air. This value is influenced by factors such as lung cell surface area, blood flow, and others, making it subject to variation based on factors like height and sex. To account for these factors, the concept of VA has been introduced, and DLCO corrected for VA is measured as DLCO/VA. Additionally, ppoDLCO represents the predicted DLCO value after surgery, and its formula is as follows.

Preoperative DLCO measurement allows the prediction of ppoDLCO by excluding the segment removed from the 19 segments and dividing by 19.

The VA is a measure of lung size that is most often determined during the measurement of DLCO via the single-breath helium dilution technique. The patient breathes normally and then exhales to the residual volume. At the residual volume, a gas mixture (carbon monoxide and helium) is inhaled forcefully to the total lung capacity (TLC), which is held for 10 seconds, after which the patient exhales. The exhaled helium concentration is used to calculate a single-breath estimate of TLC and the initial alveolar concentration of carbon monoxide. The VA is the TLC minus the physiologic dead space. In healthy individuals, the VA equals the TLC. However, in subjects with ventilatory impairment, the VA often is much lower than the TLC [10].

Postoperative pulmonary complications

This study analyzed PPCs occurring within 30 days, including prolonged air leak lasting more than 5 days; pneumonia, which was defined as meeting 3 of 5 characteristics (fever, leukocytosis, new infiltration on chest X-ray, positive sputum culture, or treatment with antibiotics); atelectasis requiring bronchoscopic toileting, bronchopleural fistula, which was defined as a major bronchial air leak confirmed by bronchoscopy; and acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Statistical analysis

Data are presented as means with standard deviations for normally distributed variables, and categorical data are presented as counts and percentages. The independent t-test was used for numerical value comparisons. All p-values were derived from 2-sided tests, and values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted, including variables such as age, sex, smoking (never versus ever), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale (<2 versus ≥2), neoadjuvant treatment, tumor size on chest computed tomography, clinical N stage (N0 versus N+), approach (VATS versus open), extent of surgery, and 3 DLCO parameters (DLCO versus ppoDLCO versus DLCO/VA). Stepwise backward elimination was employed for statistical analysis. The Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayes information criterion (BIC), which indicate how closely the model’s distribution matches the actual data distribution, were analyzed to assess model fit. Lower values of AIC and BIC are considered more consistent with actual data [11]. All statistical analyses were performed using R software ver. 3.6.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

Results

Among a total of 709 patients, PPCs developed in 106 patients (15%). Prolonged air leak, which was the most common PPC, occurred in 58 patients (55%), followed by pneumonia in 37 (35%), atelectasis in 14 (13%), empyema in 8 (7%), bronchopleural fistula in 4, and acute respiratory distress syndrome in 2 patients.

The preoperative and intraoperative characteristics of the non-PPC and PPC groups are presented in Table 1. There were no significant differences in age, ECOG performance status, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor size, clinical N stage, or extent of surgery between the 2 groups. However, the PPC group had a significantly higher proportion of men, current smokers, and patients who underwent an open surgical approach. The preoperative DLCO values were similar between the non-PPC group (103.6±19.3) and the PPC group (100.8±24.2), with no significant difference (p=0.250). However, a significantly greater percentage of patients in the PPC group had DLCO values below 80% (non-PPC versus PPC, 9.1% versus 18.9%; p=0.005). Although the mean ppoDLCO values did not differ significantly between the non-PPC group (82.9±16.6) and the PPC group (80.3±19.9, p=0.198), the PPC group had a significantly higher proportion of cases with ppoDLCO values below 60% (non-PPC versus PPC, 6.5% versus 16.0%; p=0.002). Additionally, the DLCO/VA values were significantly lower in the PPC group (non-PPC versus PPC, 99.1±18.6 versus 91.5±19.9; p<0.001), and a significantly higher percentage of patients in the PPC group had DLCO/VA values below 80% (non-PPC versus PPC, 15.1% versus 33.0%; p<0.001).

The multivariable analysis incorporated all variables used in the initial univariable analysis, with the inclusion of DLCO, ppoDLCO, and DLCO/VA. The outcomes of the multivariable regression models, which designated a DLCO below 80% as a predictor, identified significant determinants of PPCs: male sex (p=0.001), open surgical approach (p<0.001), and a DLCO below 80% (odds ratio [OR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16–3.88; p=0.015) (Table 2). Similarly, when ppoDLCO below 60% was used as a predictor, the multivariable regression model demonstrated significant predictors of PPCs: male sex (p<0.001), open surgical approach (p<0.001), and ppoDLCO below 60% (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.46–5.48; p=0.002) (Table 3). When DLCO/VA below 80% was considered as a predictor, the model revealed significant associations with PPCs for the following variables: male sex (p=0.013), open surgical approach (p=0.001), and DLCO/VA below 80% (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.31–3.48; p=0.002) (Table 4). Finally, when analyzing the 3 DLCO parameters, the multivariable regression model indicated that ppoDLCO and DLCO/VA remained significant factors (Table 5).

To determine which DLCO value was the best predictor, the AIC and BIC for each model were investigated. As shown in Table 6, DLCO/VA had the lowest AIC and BIC, indicating that it was the model with the best fit. It was found that 1.8% of patients with DLCO <80% but DLCO/VA >80% had PPCs (n=2), whereas PPCs occurred in 16.0% of patients with DLCO >80% but DLCO/VA <80% (n=17).

Discussion

The reason for conducting this study was that if a patient has a DLCO of less than 60%, there are concerns about PPCs and dyspnea after surgery; however, in reality, many of these patients did not develop PPCs or dyspnea, making this criterion difficult to apply. In patients without symptoms of dyspnea after surgery, the DLCO/VA value was found to be greater than the DLCO value. Conversely, in patients who had severe dyspnea or developed PPCs, the DLCO/VA value was lower than the DLCO value. Therefore, we investigated which of the 3 values—DLCO, ppoDLCO, and DLCO/VA—was the best predictor of PPCs in COPD patients with preserved FEV1. It was found that DLCO <80%, ppoDLCO <60%, and DLCO/VA <80% were significant risk factors for the development of PPCs. Among them, DLCO/VA was the best predictor of PPCs based on the values of the AIC and BIC as indicators of model fit.

DLCO measures the lung’s ability to absorb oxygen and eliminate carbon monoxide, and it has shown clinical efficacy in predicting patients’ symptoms or pulmonary complications after surgery [12,13]. The study by Ferguson et al. [14], analyzing 854 lung cancer surgery patients, found that in univariate analysis, hazard ratios (HRs) increased for patients with DLCO <80% (70%–79%, 1.12; 60%–69%, 1.29; <60%, 1.35). In multivariable analysis, DLCO emerged as an independent predictor of overall survival for all patients (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.08; p=0.05). At our institution, the results of PFTs included FVC (measurement, % reference), FEV1 (measurement, % reference), FEV1/FVC (%), DLCO (measurement, % reference), VA, and DLCO/VA (measurement, % reference). Among them, the DLCO/VA measures the DLCO divided by the effective VA, which is the TLC minus the dead space. Because VA represents a more accurate assessment of functioning alveoli, theoretically, DLCO/VA is the most effective predictor of remaining lung function after surgical resection. Cerfolio et al. [15] conducted a similar study that attempted to elucidate the clinical significance of DLCO/VA. They found that patients with a normal DLCO but a low DLCO/VA had a slightly higher complication rate than patients who had a low DLCO but a normal DLCO/VA. In our study, 1.8% of patients with DLCO <80% but DLCO/VA >80% had PPCs, whereas PPCs occurred in 16.0% of patients with DLCO >80% but DLCO/VA <80%.

This study was designed to explore predictors of PPCs in COPD patients with preserved FEV1 instead of moderate or severe COPD because patients and caregivers should be adequately informed and medical staff should be prepared for the risk of pulmonary complications in COPD patients with relatively good FEV1. An exemplary study by Sekine et al. [16] compared the frequency of postoperative respiratory failure between COPD patients and those without COPD. Most pulmonary complications had a higher incidence in COPD patients than in non-COPD patients (p<0.01). In this study, the average FEV1 for COPD patients was 48.79%±10.9%, and the majority had moderate or severe COPD (p<0.001). Thus, we did not think it was necessary to study the associations with DLCO in patients with moderate to severe COPD because low FEV1 alone could adequately predict the risk of PPCs in these patients and their caregivers when deciding to operate.

The similarity between the multivariable logistic regression model and the actual data was assessed using the AIC and the BIC. These are statistical metrics that evaluate the fit of a model to the data and its complexity. Generally, smaller values for both AIC and BIC are indicative of a better-fitting model. It is common practice to consider both metrics together when selecting a model [17]. In this study, AIC and BIC were used to evaluate the model’s fit. Since there are no absolute criteria for these values and they are considered relative measures, the relative values of AIC and BIC were taken into account. DLCO/VA, which had the smallest AIC and BIC values among the 3 DLCO-related variables, was determined to be the best variable in predicting PPCs. In summary, the study identified several significant risk factors for PPCs, and the assessment of these factors using a multivariable logistic regression model indicated that DLCO/VA was the most valuable predictor.

In our institution, we commonly use the 6-minute walk test in conjunction with PFT and DLCO to predict PPCs. This test is not administered to all patients; rather, it is performed based on an individual’s overall health status and physical fitness. It serves as a tool to evaluate a patient’s capacity to avoid PPCs, such as pneumonia, following lung surgery. The relationship between the 6-minute walk test and PPCs has been the subject of investigation both at our institution and in external studies. For instance, Lee et al. [18] found that patients in the moderate-risk category who covered shorter distances during the test were at a higher risk for postoperative cardiopulmonary complications than those who walked longer distances. In the future, we aim to explore the correlation between the 6-minute walk distance and DLCO/VA in order to develop more accurate predictors of PPCs.

Limitations

This study has several limitations that need to be taken into consideration. First, DLCO is a test that is highly influenced by the patient’s condition, and it may have limitations in accurately representing the patient’s true lung function. In other words, variations in the patient’s condition on the day of the test could affect DLCO values, introducing variability in the prediction of outcomes. Second, the significant difference in the number of patients between the PPC group and non-PPC group and the single-center study design could potentially introduce bias. Third, there was a lack of consideration for operation time, presence of diffuse interstitial lung disease, pack-years of smoking, and other factors that could be expected to affect PPCs.

Conclusions

Different DLCO parameters can predict PPCs in mild COPD patients after pulmonary resection for NSCLC. Although DLCO and ppoDLCO are well-known predictors of PPCs, DLCO/VA was identified as an even stronger predictor and should be considered for predicting PPCs in mild COPD patients.

Article information

Fig. 1 Flow chart showing the patient selection method. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed for a total of 709 patients. NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC, forced vital capacity; PPC, postoperative pulmonary complication; DLCO, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide.

Table 1 Preoperative and intraoperative characteristics between non-PPC and PPC groups

Characteristic	No PPC (N=603)	PPC (N=106)	p-value	
Age (yr)	69.1±7.6	70.4±9.2	0.164	
Sex (male)	457 (75.8)	95 (89.6)	0.002	
Smoking (yes)	448 (74.3)	90 (84.9)	0.032	
ECOG scale ≥2	91 (15.1)	15 (14.2)	0.918	
Neoadjuvant treatment (yes)	25 (4.1)	9 (8.5)	0.092	
DLCO (predicted %)	103.6±19.3	100.8±24.2	0.250	
DLCO (predicted %: <80%)	55 (9.1)	20 (18.9)	0.005	
ppoDLCO (predicted %)	82.9±16.6	80.3±19.9	0.198	
ppoDLCO (predicted %: <60%)	39 (6.5)	17 (16.0)	0.002	
DLCO/VA (predicted %)	99.1±18.6	91.5±19.9	<0.001	
DLCO/VA (predicted %: <80%)	91 (15.1)	35 (33.0)	<0.001	
Tumor size on chest CT (cm)	2.7±1.7	3.0±1.9	0.127	
Clinical N positive (yes)	70 (11.6)	12 (11.3)	0.619	
Approach (open)	49 (8.0)	20 (18.9)	<0.001	
Extent of surgery (lobectomy)	559 (92.7)	97 (91.5)	0.818	
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%).

PPCs, postoperative pulmonary complications; ECOG scale, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale; DLCO, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; ppoDLCO, predicted postoperative diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; DLCO/VA, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide divided by alveolar volume; CT, computed tomography.

Table 2 Multivariable logistic regression model for postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusting for multiple variables, including DLCO (model 1)

	OR (95% CI)	p-value	
Sex (male)	3.04 (1.56–5.92)	0.001	
Neoadjuvant treatment (yes)	2.67 (0.94–7.60)	0.065	
DLCO (<80%)	2.12 (1.16–3.88)	0.015	
Approach (open)	3.02 (1.61–5.67)	<0.001	
DLCO, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 3 Multivariable logistic regression model for postoperative pulmonary complication, adjusting for multiple variables including ppoDLCO (model 2)

	OR (95% CI)	p-value	
Sex (male)	3.14 (1.61–6.16)	<0.001	
Neoadjuvant treatment (yes)	2.58 (0.90–7.40)	0.078	
ppoDLCO (<60%)	2.83 (1.46–5.48)	0.002	
Approach (open)	3.20 (1.70–6.01)	<0.001	
ppoDLCO, predicted postoperative diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 4 Multivariable logistic regression model for postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusting for multiple variables, including DLCO/VA (model 3)

	OR (95% CI)	p-value	
Sex (male)	2.35 (1.20–4.61)	0.013	
Neoadjuvant treatment (yes)	2.68 (0.94–7.67)	0.066	
DLCO/VA (<80%)	2.14 (1.31–3.48)	0.002	
Approach (open)	2.66 (1.46–4.85)	0.001	
DLCO/VA, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide divided by alveolar volume; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 5 Multivariable logistic regression model for postoperative pulmonary complication by adjusting multiple variables, including DLCO, ppoDLCO, and DLCO/VA (model 3)

	OR (95% CI)	p-value	
Sex (male)	2.63 (1.32–5.24)	0.006	
Neoadjuvant treatment (yes)	2.442 (0.84–7.00)	0.103	
ppoDLCO (<60%)	2.12 (1.03–4.34)	0.041	
DLCO/VA (<80%)	1.76 (1.03–3.00)	0.038	
Approach (open)	3.03 (1.60–5.72)	0.001	
DLCO, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; ppoDLCO, predicted postoperative diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; DLCO/VA, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide divided by alveolar volume; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

Table 6 The AIC and BIC for each model

	AIC	BIC	
Model 1: variables with DLCO	576.93	608.88	
Model 2: variables with ppoLCO	573.79	605.74	
Model 3: variables with DLCO/VA	573.55	600.94	
AIC, Akaike information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion; DLCO, diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; ppoDLCO, predicted postoperative diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide; DLCO/VA, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide divided by alveolar volume.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: MHK, SC, JL. Data curation: SJ, KK, SC, JHJ, WHJ, BCHS. Formal analysis: MHK, JL, JWS. Methodology: MHK, JL, JHJ. Visualization: MHK, JL, SC. Writing–original draft: MHK, SC. Writing–review & editing: all authors. Final approval of the manuscript: all authors.

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
==== Refs
References

1 Barta JA Powell CA Wisnivesky JP 2019 Global epidemiology of lung cancer Ann Glob Health 85 8 https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.2419 10.5334/aogh.2419 30741509
2 Howington JA Blum MG Chang AC Balekian AA Murthy SC 2013 Treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines Chest 143 5 Suppl e278S e313S https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.12-2359 10.1378/chest.12-2359 23649443
3 Cavailles A Brinchault-Rabin G Dixmier A 2013 Comorbidities of COPD Eur Respir Rev 22 454 75 https://doi.org/10.1183/09059180.00008612 10.1183/09059180.00008612 24293462
4 Zhao G Li X Lei S Zhao H Zhang H Li J 2022 Prevalence of lung cancer in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis Front Oncol 12 947981 https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.947981 10.3389/fonc.2022.947981 36185264
5 Agustí A Celli BR Criner GJ 2023 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2023 report: GOLD executive summary Eur Respir J 61 2300239 https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00239-2023 10.1183/13993003.00239-2023 36858443
6 Licker MJ Widikker I Robert J 2006 Operative mortality and respiratory complications after lung resection for cancer: impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and time trends Ann Thorac Surg 81 1830 7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.11.048 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.11.048 16631680
7 Wong DH Weber EC Schell MJ Wong AB Anderson CT Barker SJ 1995 Factors associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Anesth Analg 80 276 84 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-199502000-00013 10.1097/00000539-199502000-00013 7818113
8 Ferguson MK Reeder LB Mick R 1995 Optimizing selection of patients for major lung resection J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 109 275 83 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(95)70389-6 10.1016/S0022-5223(95)70389-6 7853881
9 Ferguson MK Watson S Johnson E Vigneswaran WT 2014 Predicted postoperative lung function is associated with all-cause long-term mortality after major lung resection for cancer Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 45 660 4 https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezt462 10.1093/ejcts/ezt462 24052607
10 van der Lee I van Es HW Noordmans HJ van den Bosch JM Zanen P 2006 Alveolar volume determined by single-breath helium dilution correlates with the high-resolution computed tomography-derived nonemphysematous lung volume Respiration 73 468 73 https://doi.org/10.1159/000088711 10.1159/000088711 16205050
11 Ding J Tarokh V Yang Y 2017 Bridging AIC and BIC: a new criterion for autoregression IEEE Trans Inf Theory 64 4024 43 https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2017.2717599 10.1109/TIT.2017.2717599
12 Markos J Mullan BP Hillman DR 1989 Preoperative assessment as a predictor of mortality and morbidity after lung resection Am Rev Respir Dis 139 902 10 https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/139.4.902 10.1164/ajrccm/139.4.902 2930068
13 Bousamra M 2nd Presberg KW Chammas JH 1996 Early and late morbidity in patients undergoing pulmonary resection with low diffusion capacity Ann Thorac Surg 62 968 75 https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(96)00476-6 10.1016/0003-4975(96)00476-6 8823074
14 Ferguson MK Dignam JJ Siddique J Vigneswaran WT Celauro AD 2012 Diffusing capacity predicts long-term survival after lung resection for cancer Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 41 e81 6 https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezs049 10.1093/ejcts/ezs049 22368187
15 Cerfolio RJ Bryant AS 2009 Different diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide as predictors of respiratory morbidity Ann Thorac Surg 88 405 11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.04.015 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.04.015 19632384
16 Sekine Y Behnia M Fujisawa T 2002 Impact of COPD on pulmonary complications and on long-term survival of patients undergoing surgery for NSCLC Lung Cancer 37 95 101 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5002(02)00014-4 10.1016/S0169-5002(02)00014-4 12057873
17 Vrieze SI 2012 Model selection and psychological theory: a discussion of the differences between the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) Psychol Methods 17 228 43 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027127 10.1037/a0027127 22309957
18 Lee H Kim HK Kang D 2020 Prognostic value of 6-Min Walk Test to predict postoperative cardiopulmonary complications in patients with non-small cell lung cancer Chest 157 1665 73 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2019.12.039 10.1016/j.chest.2019.12.039 31987880
