ReviewJournal of visualized surgery2017
Multiportal video-assisted thoracic surgery, uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery and minimally invasive open chest surgery-selection criteria.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective study examining the impact of uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery on the short-term quality of life in patients with lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2020Article
- Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery Roman experience-a report of the first 16-month Roman experience.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- Correlation between controlled lung collapse and early lung injury in dogs.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- [Advances in Surgical Approach and Resection of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thoracic surgery started the path to minimally invasive surgery over a hundred years ago, with the first thoracoscopic procedure performed by Jacobeus in 1910. Interestingly, these first procedures were performed using a single port approach and were used for diagnostic and minor procedures only. For a long period of time, the progress for minimally invasive thoracic surgery was considerably slow until the early 90s, when video assisted thoracic surgery started to be used for major pulmonary resections. Since then, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) had a widespread use around the world and an ongoing search for a less invasive procedures evolved into uniportal VATS. Now, thoracic surgeons have a variety of choices for minimally invasive thoracic surgery and must be trained in these approaches to keep up with the evolution of the specialty and be up to date with the recommended treatments for diseases needing surgical intervention. The approach chosen by each surgeon is a matter of preference, while keeping in mind certain characteristics specific to the pathology and patient to be treated, the level of training of the surgeon, and the healthcare resources available. As more evidence is collected, the choice for video-assisted procedures, which have currently been proven safe, effective, less invasive and, in general, show good results, will prevail.
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.