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

38650484
10.5090/jcs.24.008
jcs-57-5-450
Clinical Research
Comparative Study of Indocyanine Green Intravenous Injection and the Inflation-Deflation Method for Assessing Resection Margins in Segmentectomy for Lung Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3847-9865
Bae Seon Yong M.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4303-8493
Yun Taeyoung M.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3272-0067
Park Ji Hyeon M.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3293-1446
Na Bubse M.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4158-9790
Na Kwon Joong M.D. 123
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9625-2672
Park Samina M.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3092-2167
Lee Hyun Joo M.D., Ph.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3550-5554
Park In Kyu M.D., Ph.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1612-1937
Kang Chang Hyun M.D., Ph.D. 12
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9006-4881
Kim Young Tae M.D., Ph.D. 123
1 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
2 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
3 Seoul National University Cancer Research Institute, Seoul, Korea
Corresponding author Kwon Joong Na Tel 82-2-2072-1423 Fax 82-2-764-3665 E-mail npeter1@snu.ac.kr ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4158-9790
See Commentary page 458.

5 9 2024
23 4 2024
23 4 2024
57 5 450457
16 1 2024
11 2 2024
29 2 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

The inflation-deflation (ID) method has long been the standard for intraoperative margin assessment in segmentectomy. However, with advancements in vision technology, the use of near-infrared mapping with indocyanine green (ICG) has become increasingly common. This study was conducted to compare the perioperative outcomes and resection margins achieved using these methods.

Methods

This retrospective study included patients who underwent direct segmentectomy for clinical stage I lung cancer between January 2018 and September 2022. We compared perioperative factors, including bronchial and parenchymal resection margins, according to the margin assessment method and the type of segmentectomy performed. Since the ICG approach was adopted in April 2021, we also examined a recent subgroup of patients treated from then onward.

Results

A total of 319 segmentectomies were performed. ID and ICG were utilized for 261 (81.8%) and 58 (18.2%) patients, respectively. Following April 2021, 61 patients (51.3%) were treated with ID, while 58 (48.7%) received ICG. We observed no significant difference in resection margins between ID and ICG for bronchial (2.7 cm vs. 2.3 cm, p=0.07) or parenchymal (2.5 cm vs. 2.3 cm, p=0.46) margins. Additionally, the length of hospitalization and the complication rate were comparable between groups. Analysis of the recent subgroup confirmed these findings, showing no significant differences in resection margins (bronchial 2.6 cm vs. 2.3 cm, p=0.25; parenchymal 2.4 cm vs. 2.3 cm, p=0.75), length of hospitalization, or complication rate.

Conclusion

The perioperative outcomes and resection margins achieved using ID and ICG were comparable, suggesting that both methods can safely guide segmentectomy procedures.

Lung neoplasms
Segmentectomy
Resection margin
Funding This work was supported by Research Program 2023, funded by the Seoul National University College of Medicine Research Foundation (800-20230541).
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, is increasingly being detected in its early stages thanks to low-dose computed tomography (CT) [1]. This development has sparked a growing interest in sublobar resection, especially segmentectomy. A recent randomized trial, termed JCOG0802/WJOG4607L, revealed that while segmentectomy was comparable to lobectomy in terms of 5-year relapse-free survival, it offered an advantage in 5-year overall survival [2]. Similarly, the CALGB140503 study by Altorki et al. [3] demonstrated that sublobar resection was not inferior to lobectomy for treating peripherally located early-stage lung cancer. These findings reinforce the case for employing sublobar resection in such instances, which has led to its broader implementation in recent years [4,5].

Securing an adequate resection margin is crucial for favorable oncologic outcomes in sublobar resection. Although the JCOG0802/WJOG4607L trial indicated similar relapse-free survival rates between segmentectomy and lobectomy, segmentectomy was associated with a higher frequency of local recurrence. Accordingly, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend parenchymal resection margins of at least 2 cm, or margins that exceed the size of the nodule, for sublobar resection [6]. To ensure these margins are achieved in segmentectomy, various methods are utilized, including preoperative CT image reconstruction algorithms and intraoperative margin assessment techniques.

Historically, the inflation and deflation (ID) method was the most common approach for intraoperative margin assessment in segmentectomy. However, fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) has become increasingly popular due to its ease of application, speed, and safety, particularly in the context of minimally invasive surgery. Prior research has shown that the ICG technique is superior to the ID method in several aspects, including operative time, visualization of the intersegmental plane, duration of drainage, rate of prolonged air leak, and length of hospitalization [7]. Although reports have been published on the surgical efficacy of both methods, limited data exist concerning their impact on the adequacy of parenchymal margins and influence on locoregional recurrence [7,8].

Hence, this study was conducted to compare the ID and ICG methods in segmentectomy by evaluating their effects on both intraoperative margin acquisition and perioperative outcomes.

Methods

Institutional review board approval

The study received approval from the institutional review board of Seoul National University Hospital. The requirement for individual consent was waived (approval no., H-2301-155-1400; dated 2023-02-07).

Patients

We conducted a retrospective review of the medical records of 542 patients who underwent segmentectomy for clinically N0M0 lung cancer, as defined by the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual, at Seoul National University Hospital from January 2018 to September 2022. We excluded patients who (1) were treated with diagnostic wedge resection prior to segmentectomy; (2) required reoperation for lung cancer; (3) underwent non-anatomical segmentectomy, such as en bloc wedge resection; or (4) presented with lesions larger than 4 cm on preoperative CT. Ultimately, a total of 319 patients were included in the analysis (Fig. 1).

Surgical procedure

During the study period at our center, segmentectomy was primarily employed for patients with peripherally located early-stage lung cancer, as well as those with limited pulmonary function or severe comorbidities. Surgeons assessed the specific indications for each patient individually. The choice of segmentectomy method—whether video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), an open approach, or a robot-assisted approach—was determined based on surgeon preference.

During the operation, the target segmental pulmonary arteries, veins, and bronchus were divided using either a surgical stapler or ligation with sutures [8]. In the ID method, after transection of the segmental bronchus, the intersegmental plane was identified through bilateral pulmonary ventilation. The plane was then marked and divided using surgical staplers [9]. In the ICG method, an infrared thoracoscopy system (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany or Stryker Corp., Kalamazoo, MI, USA) was used to identify the intersegmental plane following the intravenous injection of 3–5 mL of ICG solution (25 mg ICG in 10 mL saline). The line was similarly marked and divided using surgical staplers [10] (Fig. 2).

Segmentectomy operations were categorized as either simple or complex based on the surgical procedure and intersegmental plane. Simple segmentectomy—denoting a relatively straightforward procedure—was considered to be characterized by the creation of a single linear intersegmental plane. This category included upper division, lingular, superior, and basal segmentectomy. In contrast, complex segmentectomy was defined as involving the creation of multiple intricate intersegmental planes; this group encompassed all segmentectomy procedures not classified as simple [11].

Pathologic and clinical evaluation

The pathological stage was determined using the eighth edition of the tumor-node-metastasis classification system [12]. Parenchymal and bronchial resection margins were assessed based on the pathology of the deflated lung. The parenchymal margin was defined as the distance from the tumor edge to the nearest stapled resection edge. Similarly, the bronchial resection margin was defined as the distance from the tumor edge to the most proximal part of the resected bronchus. These measurements were taken microscopically on the resected and deflated lung after the removal of the stapling line.

Postoperative management

On the day of surgery, a chest tube was placed under controlled suction at either −10 cmH2O or −20 cmH2O. If no air leak developed, the suction was adjusted to 0 cmH2O and maintained at this level until chest tube removal. If the lung was not fully expanded, suction at −10 to −20 cmH2O was continued to promote further expansion. The chest tube was removed once drainage fell below 200–250 mL/day without evidence of an air leak.

Postoperative complications were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification [13]. Patients were discharged the day after chest tube removal unless complications necessitated further hospitalization.

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed using IBM SPSS ver. 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Numerical variables are presented as mean values with standard deviations, while categorical variables are presented as absolute numbers and percentages.

Based on the approach used for margin assessment during segmentectomy, patients were categorized into either the ID group or the ICG group. In the total analysis, the outcomes of these groups were compared across the entire study period. Additionally, since the ICG method was introduced in April 2021, a recent subgroup analysis was performed of patients treated from that time forward. For continuous variables, normality was assessed, and a Student t-test was performed [14]. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test. In cases where the chi-square test was not appropriate, the Fisher exact test was used instead. If the normality assumption was not met, the analysis proceeded under the assumption of heteroscedasticity. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Results

Clinical characteristics of participants

Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics of our study population. Of the 319 patients included, 49.2% (157 of 319) were male, and 56.4% (180 of 319) had never smoked. VATS was the preferred surgical approach, utilized in 93.4% of cases (298 of 319), while the ID method was employed in 81.8% of cases (261 of 319). Simple segmentectomy was performed more frequently than complex surgery, with a distribution of 61.8% versus 38.2%.

No significant differences in sex, age, or smoking history were observed between the ID and ICG groups. Similarly, no significant differences were found in the surgical methods selected or the clinical or pathological stages. Notably, T1a and T1b were the most common clinical stages in both groups, together representing 80.8% of the ICG and 93.1% of the ID group. Table 2 presents detailed information on tumor location and the types of segmentectomy performed. The most frequent procedure was upper division segmentectomy of the left upper lobe, accounting for 22.3% of cases.

Preoperative CT revealed no significant difference in tumor size between the groups. The average size was 1.7±0.5 cm in the ID group and 1.6±0.7 cm in the ICG group (p=0.415). This finding remained consistent in the recent subgroup analysis, with an average tumor size of 1.9±0.8 cm in the ID group compared to 1.6±0.7 cm in the ICG group (p=0.072).

Operative and pathologic details

No significant differences were observed in the number of segments resected, their locations, or the types of segmentectomy performed (Table 3). Although the overall operating time did not differ significantly between the ID and ICG groups (122.0±38.2 minutes versus 122.4±35.7 minutes, respectively; p=0.931), the ID group exhibited a significantly shorter operating time in the recent subgroup analysis (109.7±33.6 minutes versus 122.4±35.7 minutes, p=0.048).

Regarding resection margins, both the bronchial margin (ICG: 2.3±1.2 cm; ID: 2.7±1.3 cm; p=0.074) and the parenchymal margin (ICG: 2.3±1.5 cm; ID: 2.5±1.6 cm; p=0.464) were similar between groups. In the recent subgroup analysis, comparable results were observed for both bronchial (ICG: 2.3±1.2 cm; ID: 2.6±1.3 cm; p=0.255) and parenchymal (ICG: 2.3±1.5 cm; ID: 2.4±1.2 cm; p=0.754) margins (Table 3). Regarding resection margins less than 2 cm, ID was associated with a significantly lower frequency for the bronchial margins (43.1% [25/58] versus 26.8% [70/261], p=0.014); however, no significant difference was noted for the parenchymal margins (ICG: 50.0% [29/58]; ID: 37.9% [99/261]; p=0.090). In the recent group analysis, no significant difference was found for either the bronchial (ICG: 43.1% [25/58]; ID: 32.8% [20/61]; p=0.246) or the parenchymal (ICG: 50.0% [29/58]; ID: 42.6% [26/61]; p=0.420) margins.

Postoperative variables

No perioperative deaths occurred. The duration of hospitalization did not differ significantly between groups in either the total (ID: 5.9±2.2 days; ICG: 5.8±3.9 days; p=0.873) or recent (ID: 5.7±3.0 days; ICG: 5.8±3.9 days; p=0.902) analyses.

Overall, 36 patients (11.3%) experienced complications, the most common of which was persistent air leak (affecting 19 patients, or 6.0%). Across the entire study period, the ICG group exhibited a slightly lower, but statistically similar, rate of overall complications to the ID group (10.3% versus 11.5%, p=0.063). This trend was consistent in the subgroup analysis of more recent cases (10.3% versus 13.1%, p=0.220). Notably, persistent air leak was more frequent in the ID group than in the ICG group in both the total (6.5% versus 3.4%, p=0.004) and recent (8.2% versus 3.4%, p=0.005) analyses (Table 4).

Discussion

In this study, we compared the effectiveness of the ICG and ID methods for segmentectomy in early-stage lung cancer. No significant difference was observed in the resection margins achieved with these methods, and they demonstrated comparable perioperative outcomes. These results indicate the efficacy and safety of these approaches in achieving adequate margins for patients with early-stage lung cancer.

For early-stage lung cancer that is smaller than 2 cm and located peripherally, segmentectomy represents a potential alternative to lobectomy. Recent findings from the JCOG0802 randomized controlled trial lend support to earlier observational studies by showing that segmentectomy can yield comparable short- and long-term outcomes for such patients [2,15,16]. However, the success of segmentectomy depends on ensuring adequate margins, which can be achieved through intraoperative margin assessment and careful preoperative planning. Technological advancements such as preoperative 3-dimensional modeling and intraoperative near-infrared imaging with ICG have facilitated the easy and direct visualization of the intersegmental plane during segmentectomy, with the potential for improved surgical outcomes.

At our institution, ICG has been actively employed since April 2021. This approach has become the preferred choice for segmentectomy due to its simplicity in verifying the intersegmental plane during minimally invasive surgery. Previous studies have demonstrated the safety of the ICG method along with its potential benefits, which include reduced operation times and fewer complications [7,17]. However, we found that operation times were shorter in the ID group, primarily due to its longtime use and practitioners’ accumulated experience with this method. In contrast, the more recently introduced ICG presented a learning curve for our surgeons, which initially resulted in longer operating times.

In our study, the overall complication rate was similar between the 2 groups. Notably, even in the recent analysis, the rate of persistent air leak was more than twice as high in the ID group as in the ICG group, echoing findings from previous research [18]. Sun et al. [18] reported similar outcomes in their study comparing ICG and ID for segmentectomy. They noted that using the ID method to identify the intersegmental boundary line was sometimes unhelpful, particularly in patients with emphysematous lungs and impaired lung function. This approach also required deeper dissection into the hilum, which may increase the frequency of prolonged air leaks [18]. However, given that several factors are alleged to contribute to these leaks—including pleural adhesion, a history of lung inflammatory diseases, and impaired lung function—these variables should be adjusted for in future studies to clarify the impact of the ID method on this complication.

Inadequate resection margins in segmentectomy are known to lead to higher local recurrence rates [19]. Therefore, securing appropriate margins is paramount to minimizing this risk. Several previous studies have investigated methods for achieving this in sublobar resections such as segmentectomy [20-22]. Sienel et al. [20] suggested a margin exceeding 1.0 cm for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, while Mohiuddin et al. [21] recommended a margin greater than 1.5 cm. Another study indicated that a margin distance exceeding the maximum tumor diameter was optimal for preventing margin relapse [22]. Given these findings, and in accordance with NCCN guidelines, a margin of approximately 2 cm is considered sufficient for reducing local recurrence in segmentectomy for most early-stage lung cancers smaller than 2 cm [6]. Our study demonstrates that both ICG and ID methods can achieve margins exceeding 2 cm, suggesting their potential for widespread use in segmentectomy, provided they are employed appropriately and with suitable preoperative planning.

Our study had several limitations. First, its retrospective and single-center design, while incorporating a large sample relative to previous ICG-ID comparisons, was limited by the small number of participants treated with ICG. Second, due to the retrospective nature of the study, it was challenging to ascertain the number of failed cases for both methods, as well as to analyze the clinical characteristics influencing the performance of each approach. Third, the brief duration of the study precludes an analysis of the long-term oncologic outcomes associated with these methods. Fourth, factors other than the intraoperative margin assessment method, such as tumor size, tumor location, and the extent of segmental resection, likely influence both parenchymal and bronchial resection margins.

In conclusion, the ID and ICG methods demonstrated comparable perioperative outcomes, achieving safe bronchial and parenchymal resection margins exceeding 2 cm. Further research with extended follow-up periods is required to evaluate their effects on long-term oncological outcomes.

Article information

Fig. 1 Study population diagram.

Fig. 2 Segmentectomy method. (A, B) Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) left upper lobe upper division segmentectomy using the indocyanine green method. The intersegmental plane was well-visualized following an intravenous injection of indocyanine green, and stapling was performed along this plane. (C, D) VATS right lower lobe anterolateral basal segmentectomy using the inflation-deflation method. The demarcation of the intersegmental plane was identified by the contrast between the inflated and deflated areas. Stapling was then carried out along this plane.

Table 1 Patient characteristics

Characteristic	Overall (N=319)	Entire study period (total comparison)	p-value	Recent comparison	p-value	
		
ID (n=261)	ICG (n=58)	ID (n=61)	ICG (n=58)	
Sex (male)	157 (49.2)	125 (47.9)	32 (55.2)	0.324	34 (55.7)	32 (55.2)	0.955	
Age (yr)	64.8±9.3	64.7±9.4	65.1±8.6	0.748	67.9±7.6	65.1±8.6	0.064	
Smoking				0.832			0.672	
Never smoker	180 (56.4)	148 (56.7)	32 (55.2)		31 (50.8)	32 (55.2)		
Ex-smoker	95 (29.8)	76 (29.1)	19 (32.8)		19 (31.1)	19 (32.8)		
Current smoker	44 (13.8)	37 (14.2)	7 (12.0)		11 (18.0)	7 (12.0)		
Tumor size on CT (cm)	1.7±0.7	1.7±0.5	1.6±0.7	0.415	1.9±0.8	1.6±0.7	0.072	
Part solid nodule	166 (52.0)	135 (51.7)	31 (53.4)	0.554	38 (62.3)	31 (53.4)	0.333	
Solid size on CT (cm)	1.2±0.9	1.2±0.9	1.0±0.4	0.082	1.2±0.9	1.0±0.4	0.132	
Clinical stage				0.064			0.082	
T1a N0M0	151 (47.3)	125 (47.9)	26 (44.8)		29 (47.5)	26 (44.8)		
T1b N0M0	114 (35.7)	86 (32.9)	28 (48.3)		19 (31.1)	28 (48.3)		
T1c N0M0	24 (7.5)	22 (8.4)	2 (3.4)		5 (8.2)	2 (3.4)		
T2a N0M0	30 (9.4)	28 (10.7)	2 (3.4)		8 (13.1)	2 (3.4)		
Pathologic stage				0.959			0.547	
T1a N0M0	143 (44.8)	114 (43.7)	29 (50.0)		24 (39.3)	29 (50.0)		
T1b N0M0	109 (34.2)	90 (34.5)	19 (32.8)		19 (31.1)	19 (32.8)		
T1c N0M0	25 (7.8)	21 (8.0)	4 (6.9)		8 (13.1)	4 (6.6)		
T2a N0M0	33 (10.3)	27 (10.3)	6 (10.3)		8 (13.1)	6 (10.3)		
T2b N0M0	3 (0.9)	3 (1.1)	0		1 (1.6)	0		
T2a N1M0	1 (0.3)	1 (0.4)	0		0	0		
T2a N2M0	2 (0.6)	2 (0.8)	0		0	0		
T3 N0M0	2 (0.6)	2 (0.8)	0		0	0		
T3 N2M0	1 (0.3%)	1 (0.4)	0		1 (1.6)	0		
Method				0.652			0.755	
VATS	298 (93.4)	244 (93.5)	54 (93.1)		56 (91.8)	54 (93.1)		
Robot	18 (5.6)	14 (5.4)	4 (6.9)		5 (8.2)	4 (6.9)		
Thoracotomy	3 (0.9)	3 (1.1)	0		0	0		
Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation.

ID, inflation and deflation; ICG, indocyanine green; CT, computed tomography; VATS, video-assisted thoracic surgery.

Table 2 Location of segment (N=319)

Variable	No. (%)	
Right upper lobe (n=53)		
Apical	6 (1.9)	
Posterior	22 (6.9)	
Anterior	10 (3.1)	
Apical+posterior	10 (3.1)	
Apical+anterior	5 (1.6)	
Right lower lobe (n=90)		
Superior	38 (11.9)	
Anterior basal	12 (3.8)	
Medial basal	1 (0.3)	
Anterior basal+medial basal	4 (1.3)	
Anterior basal+lateral basal	10 (3.1)	
Superior+medial basal	1 (0.3)	
Posterior+lateral basal	2 (0.6)	
Superior+medial basal+posterior basal	1 (0.3)	
Common basal	21 (6.6)	
Left upper lobe (n=110)		
Apicoposterior	6 (0.6)	
Anterior	4 (1.1)	
Posterior	2 (0.6)	
Posterior+lingula	2 (0.6)	
Posterior+superior lingula	1 (0.3)	
Upper division	71 (22.3)	
Lingula	24 (7.5)	
Left lower lobe (n=66)		
Superior	28 (8.8)	
Superior+anterior basal	1 (0.3)	
Superior+posteromedial basal	1 (0.3)	
Anteromedial basal	10 (3.1)	
Anteromedial basal+lateral basal	3 (0.9)	
Posterior basal	3 (0.9)	
Posterior basal+lateral basal	2 (0.6)	
Common basal	18 (5.6)	
Values are presented as number (%).

Table 3 Operative variables and pathologic details

Variable	Total (N=319)	Entire study period (total comparison)	p-value	Recent comparison	p-value	
		
ID (n=261)	ICG (n=58)	ID (n=61)	ICG (n=58)	
Resected segment(s)				0.653			0.902	
1	124 (38.9)	104 (39.9)	20 (34.5)		24 (39.3)	20 (34.5)		
2	82 (25.7)	64 (24.5)	17 (29.3)		17 (27.9)	17 (29.3)		
3	75 (23.5)	63 (24.1)	12 (20.7)		13 (21.3)	12 (20.7)		
4	38 (11.9)	30 (11.5)	9 (15.5)		7 (11.5)	9 (15.5)		
Location				0.801			0.764	
Right upper lobe	53 (16.6)	44 (16.9)	9 (15.5)		6 (9.8)	9 (15.5)		
Right lower lobe	90 (28.2)	76 (29.1)	14 (24.1)		18 (29.5)	14 (24.1)		
Left upper lobe	110 (34.5)	87 (33.3)	23 (39.7)		23 (37.7)	23 (39.7)		
Left lower lobe	66 (20.7)	54 (20.7)	12 (20.7)		14 (23.0)	12 (20.7)		
Segmentectomy				0.402			0.432	
Simple	197 (61.8)	164 (62.8)	33 (56.9)		39 (63.9)	33 (56.9)		
Complex	122 (38.2)	97 (37.1)	25 (43.1)		22 (36.1)	25 (43.1)		
Operation time (min)	122.1±37.7	122.0±38.2	122.4±35.7	0.931	109.7±33.6	122.4±35.7	0.048*	
Diagnosis				0.722			0.592	
Adenocarcinoma	299 (93.7)	245 (93.9)	54 (93.1)		55 (90.2)	54 (93.1)		
Squamous cell carcinoma	18 (5.6)	14 (5.4)	4 (6.9)		5 (8.2)	4 (6.9)		
Others	2 (0.6)	2 (0.7)	0		1 (1.6)	0		
Resection margin (cm)								
Bronchial	2.7±1.3 (0.3–6.9)	2.7±1.3 (0.3–6.9)	2.3±1.2 (0.5–6.0)	0.074	2.6±1.3 (0.3–6.5)	2.3±1.2 (0.5–6.0)	0.255	
Parenchymal	2.5±1.6 (0.2–14.2)	2.5±1.6 (0.2–14.2)	2.3±1.5 (0.4–6.9)	0.464	2.4±1.2 (0.3–5.5)	2.3±1.5 (0.4–6.9)	0.754	
Values are presented as number (%), mean±SD, or mean±SD (range).

ID, inflation and deflation; ICG, indocyanine green; SD, standard deviation.

*p<0.05.

Table 4 Postoperative outcomes

Variable	Total (N=319)	Entire study period (total comparison)	p-value	Recent group comparison	p-value	
		
ID (n=261)	ICG (n=58)	ID (n=61)	ICG (n=58)	
Hospital stay (day)	5.9±2.6	5.9±2.2	5.8±3.9	0.873	5.7±3.0	5.8±3.9	0.902	
Complication	36 (11.3)	30 (11.5)	6 (10.3)	0.063	8 (13.1)	6 (10.3)	0.220	
Pneumonia	12 (3.8)	10 (3.8)	2 (3.4)	0.716	2 (3.3)	2 (3.4)	0.327	
Persistent air leak	19 (6.0)	17 (6.5)	2 (3.4)	0.004*	5 (8.2)	2 (3.4)	0.005*	
Pneumothorax	2 (0.6)	2 (0.7)	0	0.467	0	0	1.000	
Atelectasis	1 (0.3)	0	1 (1.7)	0.102	0	1 (1.7)	0.305	
Chylothorax	1 (0.3)	1 (0.4)	0	0.716	1 (1.6)	0	0.330	
Bleeding	1 (0.3)	0	1 (1.7)	0.102	0	1 (1.7)	0.305	
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%).

ID, inflation and deflation; ICG, indocyanine green.

*p<0.05.

Author contributions

Conceptualization: KJN. Data curation: SYB. Formal analysis: SYB. Funding acquisition: not applicable. Investigation: SYB. Methodology: KJN, SYB. Project administration: KJN. Resources: TY, JHP, BN, KJN, SP, HJL, IKP, CHK, YTK. Supervision: KJN, SP, HJL, IKP, CHK, YTK. Validation: KJN, SYB. Visualization: KJN, SYB. Writing–original draft: SYB. Writing–review & editing: KJN, SYB, SP, HJL, IKP, CHK, YTK. Approval of final manuscript: all authors.

Conflict of interest

Activities not related to this article: Kwon Joong Na is a cofounder and chief medical officer of Portrai. Except for that, no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
==== Refs
References

1 Lancaster HL Heuvelmans MA Oudkerk M 2022 Low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening: clinical evidence and implementation research J Intern Med 292 68 80 https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.13480 10.1111/joim.13480 35253286
2 Saji H Okada M Tsuboi M 2022 Segmentectomy versus lobectomy in small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (JCOG0802/WJOG4607L): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial Lancet 399 1607 17 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02333-3 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02333-3 35461558
3 Altorki N Wang X Kozono D 2023 Lobar or sublobar resection for peripheral stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 388 489 98 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2212083 10.1056/NEJMoa2212083 36780674
4 Kim D Lee JW 2022 Current status of lung cancer and surgery based on studies using a nationwide database J Chest Surg 55 1 9 https://doi.org/10.5090/jcs.21.105 10.5090/jcs.21.105 34907096
5 Kneuertz PJ Zhao J D'Souza DM Abdel-Rasoul M Merritt RE 2022 National trends and outcomes of segmentectomy in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database Ann Thorac Surg 113 1361 9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.07.056 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.07.056 34428432
6 Ettinger DS Wood DE Aisner DL 2021 NCCN guidelines insights: non-small cell lung cancer, version 2 J Natl Compr Canc Netw 19 254 66 https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2021.0013 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0013 33668021
7 Liu Z Yang R Cao H 2020 Near-infrared intraoperative imaging with indocyanine green is beneficial in video-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy for patients with chronic lung diseases: a retrospective single-center propensity-score matched analysis J Cardiothorac Surg 15 303 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-020-01310-z 10.1186/s13019-020-01310-z 33028380
8 Yotsukura M Okubo Y Yoshida Y Nakagawa K Watanabe SI 2021 Indocyanine green imaging for pulmonary segmentectomy JTCVS Tech 6 151 8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xjtc.2020.12.005 10.1016/j.xjtc.2020.12.005 34318180
9 Hwang Y Kang CH Kim HS Jeon JH Park IK Kim YT 2015 Comparison of thoracoscopic segmentectomy and thoracoscopic lobectomy on the patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity score matching study Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 48 273 8 https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezu422 10.1093/ejcts/ezu422 25406426
10 He H Zhao H Ma L 2022 Identification of the intersegmental plane by arterial ligation method during thoracoscopic segmentectomy J Cardiothorac Surg 17 281 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-022-02011-5 10.1186/s13019-022-02011-5 36333814
11 Handa Y Tsutani Y Mimae T Tasaki T Miyata Y Okada M 2019 Surgical outcomes of complex versus simple segmentectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer Ann Thorac Surg 107 1032 9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.11.018 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.11.018 30550801
12 Goldstraw P Chansky K Crowley J 2016 The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (eighth) edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 11 39 51 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2015.09.009 10.1016/j.jtho.2015.09.009 26762738
13 Clavien PA Barkun J de Oliveira ML 2009 The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience Ann Surg 250 187 96 https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2 19638912
14 Mishra P Singh U Pandey CM Mishra P Pandey G 2019 Application of Student's t-test, analysis of variance, and covariance Ann Card Anaesth 22 407 11 https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_94_19 10.4103/aca.ACA_94_19 31621677
15 Okada M Yoshikawa K Hatta T Tsubota N 2001 Is segmentectomy with lymph node assessment an alternative to lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer of 2 cm or smaller? Ann Thorac Surg 71 956 61 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-4975(00)02223-2 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)02223-2 11269480
16 Cao C Chandrakumar D Gupta S Yan TD Tian DH 2015 Could less be more?: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sublobar resections versus lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer according to patient selection Lung Cancer 89 121 32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.05.010 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.05.010 26033208
17 Sun Y Zhang Q Wang Z Shao F Yang R 2019 Is the near-infrared fluorescence imaging with intravenous indocyanine green method for identifying the intersegmental plane concordant with the modified inflation-deflation method in lung segmentectomy? Thorac Cancer 10 2013 21 https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.13192 10.1111/1759-7714.13192 31482671
18 Sun Y Zhang Q Wang Z Shao F Yang R 2021 Feasibility investigation of near-infrared fluorescence imaging with intravenous indocyanine green method in uniport video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical segmentectomy for identifying the intersegmental boundary line Thorac Cancer 12 1407 14 https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.13923 10.1111/1759-7714.13923 33728793
19 El-Sherif A Fernando HC Santos R 2007 Margin and local recurrence after sublobar resection of non-small cell lung cancer Ann Surg Oncol 14 2400 5 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9421-9 10.1245/s10434-007-9421-9 17505859
20 Sienel W Stremmel C Kirschbaum A 2007 Frequency of local recurrence following segmentectomy of stage IA non-small cell lung cancer is influenced by segment localisation and width of resection margins: implications for patient selection for segmentectomy Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 31 522 8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.12.018 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.12.018 17229574
21 Mohiuddin K Haneuse S Sofer T 2014 Relationship between margin distance and local recurrence among patients undergoing wedge resection for small (≤2 cm) non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 147 1169 77 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.11.056 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.11.056 24507406
22 Sawabata N Ohta M Matsumura A 2004 Optimal distance of malignant negative margin in excision of nonsmall cell lung cancer: a multicenter prospective study Ann Thorac Surg 77 415 20 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01511-X 10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01511-X 14759408
