• Sara Sakowitz, Syed Shahyan Bakhtiyar, Joanna Curry, Konmal Ali, Paul Toste, and Peyman Benharash.
• Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Laboratories (CORELAB), Department of Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.
• J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2024 Oct 1; 168 (4): 12701280.e11270-1280.e1.

ObjectiveMinimally invasive resection for non-small cell lung cancer has been linked to decreased postoperative morbidity. This work sought to characterize factors associated with receiving minimally invasive surgery for surgically resectable non-small cell lung cancer.MethodsAll adults undergoing lobectomy/sublobar resection for stage I non-small cell lung cancer were identified using the 2010-2020 National Cancer Database. Those undergoing thoracoscopic/robotic procedures comprised the minimally invasive resection cohort (others: open). Hospitals were stratified by minimally invasive resection procedure volume, with the top quartile considered high minimally invasive resection volume centers. Multivariable models were constructed to assess the independent association between the patients, diseases, and hospital factors and the likelihood of receiving minimally invasive resection.ResultsOf 217,762 patients, 112,304 (52%) underwent minimally invasive resection. The proportion of minimally invasive resection procedures increased from 27% in 2010 to 72% in 2020 (P < .001). After adjustment, several factors were independently associated with decreased odds of receiving minimally invasive resection, including lower quartiles of median neighborhood income (51st-75th percentile adjusted odds ratio, 0.92, 95% CI, 0.89-0.94; 26th-50th percentile adjusted odds ratio, 0.86, CI, 0.83-0.89; 0-25th percentile adjusted odds ratio, 0.78, CI, 0.75-0.81; reference: 76th-100th percentile income) and care at community hospitals (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70, CI, 0.68-0.71; reference: academic centers). Among patients receiving care at high minimally invasive resection volume centers, lowest income remained linked with reduced likelihood of undergoing minimally invasive resection from 2010 to 2015 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85, CI, 0.77-0.94), but did not alter the odds of minimally invasive resection in later years (adjusted odds ratio, 1.01, CI, 0.87-1.16; reference: highest income).ConclusionsThis study identified significant community income-based disparities in the likelihood of undergoing minimally invasive resection as definitive surgical treatment. Novel interventions are warranted to expand access to high-volume minimally invasive resection centers and ensure equitable access to minimally invasive surgery.Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

42 keywords...

hide…