ReviewJournal of visualized surgery2017
Cost/efficacy evaluation of the technologies applied to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-cost video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy versus regular VATS lobectomy: a propensity-matched retrospective cohort study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Internet of Things-Based Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Combined with Edaravone Anesthesia in Thoracoscopic Lobectomy.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of thoracoscopic versus thoracotomy sleeve lobectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- National practice trends for the surgical management of lung cancer in the CMS population: an atlas of care.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Superior outcomes after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) pulmonary lobectomy have been demonstrated, compared with thoracotomy, for patients affected by early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, in an era of rising health care costs and controlled resources, the overall medical cost of surgical procedures is measured by the hospitals' marketing offices. Several factors such as surgical technique, conversion rate, length of stay, post-operative complications occurrence and mainly the introduction of new surgical technologies (disposables and devices) could influence the cost-effectiveness of VATS procedures. However, increased operating room costs are counteracted by shorter hospital stay and reduced ward bed stays providing further resources for other patients. Thus, choosing a surgical approach and assessing whether a specific technique is cost-effective is mandatory for a modern thoracic surgeon to justify its expenses. This review tries to reach a conclusion by comparing all recent studies reporting a cost analysis for VATS lobectomy, especially for new technologies used for VATS lobectomy. Nevertheless, no sufficient evidences are published to assess VATS new technologies sustainability and further cost analyses are necessary before VATS lobectomy expense is deemed justified.
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.