ArticleOncology letters2018
Analysis of middle- and long-term efficacy of thoracoscope-assisted segmental resection of the lung on non-small cell lung cancer in the early stage.
Article in Oncology letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The clinical effect of thoracoscopic segmentectomy in the treatment of lung malignancies less than 2CM in diameter.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical therapeutic effects and prognosis of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery-guided pulmonary lobectomy combined with mediastinal lymph node dissection in lung carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the short- and long-term efficacy of thoracoscope-assisted segmental resection of lung of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We selected a total of 94 patients with lung cancer in the early stage who were admitted to The First People's Hospital of Xuzhou for treatment between March 2011 and February 2012. Patients were divided randomly into either the control group (n=47) or the observation group (n=47). In the observation group, patients received thoracoscope-assisted segmental resection of lung, while in the control group, the conventional thoracic surgery was performed for treatment. After surgeries, we observed the incidence rate of complications among the two groups, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was adopted to detect levels of inflammatory factors. We also compared the cardiac and pulmonary functions, the levels of immunoglobulins and subgroups of T lymphocytes in the peripheral blood of the patients. In addition, all patients attended a 5-year follow-up to determine the recurrence and survival rate. Compared to the control group, patients in the observation group had significantly less intra-operative bleeding volume, a shorter duration of surgery, and suffered slighter pain after surgery (P<0.05). After surgery, the incidence rate of complications in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). After surgeries, patients in both groups experienced a remarkable improvement in cardiac and pulmonary functions, and the improvement in the observation group was superior to that of the control group (P<0.05). During the 5-year follow-up, the survival rate of the observation group is significantly higher than that in thecontrol group, and patients in the observation group experienced a lower recurrence rate than those in the control group (P<0.05). Thus, thoracoscope-assisted segmental resection of lung is of great significance in clinical practice.
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.