Abstract Background This study aims to provide a comprehensive bibliometric evaluation of the most influential publications on salvage surgery for non-small cell lung cancer from 1991 to 2023, highlighting scientific trends, geographic contributions, journal impact, and major clinical themes. A systematic search was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection using the terms “salvage surgery” and “non-small cell lung cancer.” Only English, SCI-Expanded research articles reporting surgical intervention were included. Among 302 records, the 20 most cited studies were selected. Publication year, country, journal, citation count, clinical characteristics, surgical details, and oncologic outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Despite increasing clinical interest, no prior study has systematically synthesized both bibliometric trends and clinical outcomes in salvage surgery for NSCLC. Results The included studies received a total of 508 citations, with Japan contributing the highest number (45%). Seventy-five percent of publications were produced in the last decade, reflecting rising academic interest. The most prominent journals were The Annals of Thoracic Surgery and The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery . Clinical cohorts were small and typically composed of advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lobectomy was the predominant procedure, while morbidity ranged from 19 to 70% and mortality remained low. Achieving R0 resection, pathological N0 status, and lower disease stage were consistently associated with improved survival. Conclusions This bibliometric assessment demonstrates that salvage surgery is a feasible and oncologically valuable option for selected non-small cell lung cancer patients following definitive chemoradiotherapy or other non-operative treatments. Despite high morbidity, perioperative mortality is acceptable, and complete resection remains the strongest predictor of long-term survival. Future prospective, multicenter, and standardized studies are required to strengthen the evidence base and refine patient selection.
Öztürk et al. (Wed,) studied this question.