Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28614249›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Thymectomy via open surgery or robotic video assisted thoracic surgery: Can a recommendation already be made?

Judith Buentzel, Carmen Straube, Judith Heinz, Christian Roever, Alexander Beham, Andreas Emmert, Marc Hinterthaner, Bernhard C Danner, Alexander Emmert

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Complications of robot-assisted thymectomy: A single-arm meta-analysis and systematic review.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Minimally invasiveJournal of thoracic disease · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A case of thymic basaloid carcinoma with rectal carcinoma.International journal of surgery case reports · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Judith BuentzelDepartment of Haematology and Oncology Department of Medical Statistics Department of General, Visceral and Pediatric Surgery, University of Goettingen, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen Westklinikum Hamburg, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Hamburg Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Goettingen, University Medical Center Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Carmen Straube
Judith Heinz
Christian Roever
Alexander Beham
Andreas Emmert
Marc Hinterthaner
Bernhard C Danner
Alexander Emmert

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (RVATS) is a relatively new technique applied for thymectomies. Only few studies directly compare RVATS to the mainstay therapy, open surgery (sternotomy).

methodsA systematic search of the literature was performed in October 2016. The meta-analysis includes studies comparing robotassisted and open thymectomy regarding operation time, length of hospitalization, intraoperative blood loss, and chest-in-tube days, postoperative complications, reoperation, arrhythmic events, pleural effusion, and postoperative bleeding.

resultsOf 626 studies preliminary screened, 7 articles were included. There were no significant differences in comparison of operation time (-3.19 minutes [95% confidence interval, 95% CI -112.43 to 106.05]; P = .94), but patients undergoing RVATS spent significantly less time in hospital (-4.06 days [95% CI -7.98 to -0.13], P = .046). There were fewer chests-in-tube days (-2.50 days [95% CI -15.01 to 10.01]; P = .24) and less intraoperative blood loss (-256.84 mL [95% CI -627.47 to 113.80]; P = .10) observed in the RVATS group; due to a small number of studies, these results were not statistically significant. There were also less post-operative complications in the RVATS group (12 complications in 209 patients vs 51 complications in 259 patients); however, this difference was not statistical significant (odds ratio 0.27, 95% CI 0.07-1.12; P = .06).

conclusionsPatients undergoing RVATS spent less time in hospital than patients treated by open surgery (sternotomy). These patients tended to have less postoperative complications, less intraoperative blood loss, and fewer chest-in-tube days. We found evidence for the safety and feasibility of RVATS compared with open surgery, which has to be further confirmed in randomised controlled trials.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresThymectomy

Identifiers

PMID28614249
PMCPMC5478334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.