ReviewJournal of visualized surgery2017
Robotic lung cancer surgery: review of experience and costs.
Review in Journal of visualized surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative cost analysis study of pulmonary robotic and video-assisted lobectomy: results of a randomized controlled trial (BRAVO Study).Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2025Trial
- Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy versus open or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Outcomes of conservative management for chylothorax following minimally invasive lung cancer surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis of First 50 Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgeries in a University Teaching Hospital: Anesthetic Considerations and Postoperative Outcomes.Annals of cardiac anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Developing and Comparing Four Families of Bayesian Network Autocorrelation Models for Binary Outcomes: Estimating Peer Effects Involving Adoption of Medical Technologies.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025Article
- Bayesian Hierarchical Network Autocorrelation Models for Estimating Direct and Indirect Effects of Peer Hospitals on Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients.Research square · 2024Article
- Bayesian hierarchical network autocorrelation models for estimating direct and indirect effects of peer hospitals on outcomes of hospitalized patients.Applied network science · 2024Article
- Robotic Surgery and Hospital Reimbursement.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2023Review
- Clinical Efficacy of Thoracoscopic Surgery with the da Vinci Surgical System versus Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Lung Cancer.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
- Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery reduces perioperative complications and achieves a similar long-term survival profile as posterolateral thoracotomy in clinical N2 stage non-small cell lung cancer patients: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Article
- Building a Large Robotic Thoracic Surgery Program in an Emerging Country: Experience in Brazil.World journal of surgery · 2019Article
- Different techniques in robotic lung resection.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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Use of robot-assisted techniques is growing fast in several surgical disciplines, now including thoracic surgery. The paper reviews experience of robotic surgery to resect lung cancer and in particular analyzes data on the costs of these procedures in comparison to open surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Retrospective studies published over 14 years show that robotic surgery for lung cancer has the advantages of minimally invasive surgery for patients, and some advantages over VATS for the surgeon. Limited data indicate that oncological outcomes are comparable with those of VATS and open surgery, while lymph node dissection may be more radical. Other studies indicate that robotic surgery for lung cancer offers no advantages either in terms of costs or outcomes. The high costs of purchase, maintenance and consumables are a concern and continue to limit uptake of robot systems in thoracic surgery. Most studies-but not all-indicate that robotic surgery for lung cancer is more expensive than VATS and open surgery. However limited data also indicate that hospitals can make a profit from robotic thoracic surgery, as costs seem to be lower than reimbursements from paying bodies. Nevertheless robotic thoracic surgery is still too expensive for many public hospitals, particularly in low income countries. Entry of new surgical robot manufacturers onto the market will bring much-needed competition that may also lead to cost reduction.
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.