Pulmonary ground glass opacity (GGO) is becoming an important clinical dilemma in oncology as its diagnosis in clinical practice is increasing due to the introduction of low dose computed tomography (CT) scan and screening. The incidence of cancer in GGO has been reported as high as 63%. The purpose of this manuscript is to review best available evidence papers on management of GGO in lung cancer to address the following questions: (I) how to correlate CT findings with malignancy; (II) when and who operate? (III) how to perform intraoperative detection of intrapulmonary GGO? (IV) wedge, segmentectomy or lobectomy? Taking a cue from a clinical scenario, a review on PubMed was conducted. The words search included: “Lung ground glass opacity”. The research was limited to human and adults. We considered all published articles from 1990 to April 2017, which reported on at least sufficient data, to be eligible. The literature search was limited to articles in English. A total of 1,211 articles have been found. Interestingly, while in 1991, only one paper was published on low-dose high-resolution CT, in 2016, 126 papers have been published. Most cited and recent papers have been chosen for discussion. Many recent papers have been published from Asian groups. It is clearly not possible to conclude from these data what is the best strategy for GGO in the lung cancer screening era. Certainly, when there is uncertainty, personal opinion and experience should not influence decision making, on the contrary decision should be taken by a multidisciplinary team.

To assess if individual case volume of oesophagectomy for cancer influences the risk of mortality and long-term survival. Between January 1994 and December 2005, 195 resections for oesophageal cancer were performed by nine surgeons in a single institution. Operative mortality, defined as in hospital death, was compared between the high-volume and low-volume surgeons. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the risk factors for death between the two groups, also in the presence of covariates. There were 140 males and 55 females with mean age of 63.4 (32-84). Two high-volume surgeons performed 61% (118) of the operations with a mean of 11 per year compared to 4 per year in the low-volume group. The patients in the two groups were matched for age (63 years vs 64; p=0.53), sex (67 vs 79% male; p=0.07). Ivor Lewis resections were performed more frequently by high-volume surgeons (95 vs 73%; p<0.001). The operative mortality rate was much lower when high case volume surgeons performed the procedure (4 vs 17%; p=0.001). The relative risk of death when low-volume surgeons performed the procedure was 4.59 (95% CI 1.57-13.46; p<0.001). In-hospital mortality was significantly associated with low-volume surgeon when controlling separately for age (OR 4.60; 95% CI 1.55, 13.60, p=0.006), tumor stage (OR 3.76; 95% CI 1.24, 11.45, p=0.02) and tumor type (OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.29, 11.60, p=0.016). Kaplan-Meier curves comparing the survival of high- and low-volume surgeons showed no statistical differences (Log rank p=0.48). Operative mortality rate for oesophagectomy for cancer is strongly influenced by case volume and was 4.6-fold higher when performed by surgeons with low case volume. Patients with oesophageal cancer in need of an oesophagectomy may benefit from referral to a high-volume thoracic surgeon.