Choosing a lung-sparing resection over a more extensive resection is most justified when:

Choosing a lung-sparing resection over a more extensive resection is most justified when:

• A. Negative margins can still be achieved
• B. The tumor is central and large
• C. The patient insists on maximal tissue removal
• D. Margin positivity is anticipated

Answer: (A)

In lung cancer surgery, the goal is to balance removing the tumor with preserving as much healthy lung as possible. A lung-sparing approach is justified when you can still achieve negative margins—that is, no tumor at the inked resection edge—with a more limited operation. This lets you remove the cancer effectively while preserving lung function. If the tumor were central and large, or if margins were likely to be positive, a more extensive resection would be needed to ensure oncologic control, and lung tissue preservation would not be the priority. Patient desires for maximal tissue removal don’t guarantee oncologic adequacy, making this option less appropriate when margins can be secured with a smaller resection.

In lung cancer surgery, the goal is to balance removing the tumor with preserving as much healthy lung as possible. A lung-sparing approach is justified when you can still achieve negative margins—that is, no tumor at the inked resection edge—with a more limited operation. This lets you remove the cancer effectively while preserving lung function. If the tumor were central and large, or if margins were likely to be positive, a more extensive resection would be needed to ensure oncologic control, and lung tissue preservation would not be the priority. Patient desires for maximal tissue removal don’t guarantee oncologic adequacy, making this option less appropriate when margins can be secured with a smaller resection.