Trial reportBMJ open2017
Medicoeconomic analysis of lobectomy using thoracoscopy versus thoracotomy for lung cancer: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Lungsco01).
Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02502318 (Medicoeconomic Analysis of Lobectomy Using Thoracoscopy vs Thoracotomy for Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Medicoeconomic Analysis of Lobectomy Using Thoracoscopy vs Thoracotomy for Lung Cancer: a Multicentric Randomized Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus open lobectomy for lung cancer on recovery assessed using self-reported physical function: VIOLET RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Trial
- The impact of VATS anatomic segmentectomy on postoperative stress response and respiratory function in early-stage NSCLC patients.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Impact of robotic access on outcomes after lung cancer surgery in France: Analysis from the Epithor database.JTCVS open · 2023Article
- Article
- A micro-costing evaluation of lobectomy by thoracotomy versus thoracoscopy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Pulmonary nodules and mini-invasive lung resection: do we have the right "tool" for their intraoperative localization?Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn the last decade, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has had a major effect on thoracic surgery. Retrospective series have reported benefits of VATS when compared with open thoracotomy in terms of postoperative pain, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. However, no large randomised control trial has been conducted to assess the reality of the potential benefits of VATS lobectomy or its medicoeconomic impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The French National Institute of Health funded Lungsco01 to determine whether VATS for lobectomy is superior to open thoracotomy for the treatment of NSCLC in terms of economic cost to society. This trial will also include an analysis of postoperative outcomes, the length of hospital stay, the quality of life, long-term survival and locoregional recurrence. The study design is a two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial comparing VATS lobectomy with lobectomy using thoracotomy for the treatment of NSCLC. Patients will be eligible if they have proven or suspected lung cancer which could be treated by lobectomy. Patients will be randomised via an independent service. All patients will be monitored according to standard thoracic surgical practices. All patients will be evaluated at day 1, day 30, month 3, month 6, month 12 and then every year for 2 years thereafter. The recruitment target is 600 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has been approved by the French National Research Ethics Committee (CPP Est I: 09/06/2015) and the French Medicines Agency (09/06/2015). Results will be presented at national and international meetings and conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02502318.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.