ArticleZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2018
[A Paired Case Controlled Study Comparing the Short-term Outcomes of Da Vinci RATS and VATS Approach for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].
Article in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of perioperative outcomes for da Vinci robotic-assisted, laparoscopic and open surgery in oncologic procedures: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of evidence from China.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of robotic and video assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer across key outcomes.iScience · 2026Article
- Robotic and video-assisted lobectomy/segmentectomy for non-small cell lung cancer have similar perioperative outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- [Comparison of Short-term Outcomes of Lung Segmentectomy by Robotic-assisted and Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2019Article
- Review of robotic-assisted surgery: what the future looks like through a spine oncology lens.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDa Vinci Surgical System is one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century, which represents the development direction of the precise minimally invasive surgical techniques, the aim of this study was to comparing the short-term outcomes between da Vinci robot-assisted lobectomy and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer.
methods45 pairs of non-small cell lung cancer patients underwent pulmonary lobectomy with da Vinci Robotic assisted thoracoscopic (RATS) and VATS approach during the same period from January 2014 to January 2017. The operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), total number and total groups of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative duration of drainage, the first day volume of drainage, total volume of drainage were compared.
resultsNo perioperative death and convertion to thoracotomy occured in both groups. There were significant difference between RATS group and VATS group in EBL [(50.30±32.33) mL vs (208.60±132.63) mL], the first day volume of drainage [(275.00±145.42) mL vs (347.60±125.80) mL], the dissected total number [(22.67±9.67) vs (15.51±5.41)] and total team [(6.31±1.43) vs (4.91±1.04)] of lymph node. There were no significant difference in other outcomes.
conclusionsRATS is safe and effective and took better short-outcomes than VATS in non-small cell lung cancer.
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.