ArticleThe Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2019
Comparison of Uniportal versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Pulmonary Segmentectomy.
Article in The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2023Pooled it
- Perioperative comparison of uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for complex segmentectomy of the lower lung lobe.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Learning curve for double-port video-assisted thoracoscopic lung segmentectomy: a propensity score matching study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Efficacy of uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
- Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery: segmentectomy versus lobectomy-early outcomes.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2024Article
- Perioperative outcomes of uniportal versus three-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in lung cancer patients aged ≥ 75 years old: a cohort study.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Uniportal versus multiportal VATS segmentectomy: less is more?Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- UniportalJournal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Learning curve for two-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lung segmentectomy.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Minimally Invasive Approach to Esophageal Perforation after Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Report of 2 Cases.The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2020Article
- Nodal Outcomes of Uniportal versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Clinical Stage I Lung Cancer.The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2020Article
- Uniportal VATS approach to sub-lobar anatomic resections: literature review and personal experience.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Comparing immediate postoperative outcomes of different VATS approaches for anatomical lung resection: a single-centre retrospective study.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has proven safe and effective for pulmonary wedge resection and lobectomy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of uniportal VATS segmentectomy by comparing its outcomes with those of the multiportal approach at a single center.
methodsThe records of 84 patients who underwent VATS segmentectomy from August 2010 to August 2018, including 33 in the uniportal group and 51 in the multiportal group, were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.
resultsAnesthesia and operative times were similar in the uniportal and multiportal groups (215 minutes vs. 220 minutes, respectively; p=0.276 and 180 minutes vs. 198 minutes, respectively; p=0.396). Blood loss was significantly lower in the uniportal group (50 mL vs. 100 mL, p=0.013) and chest tube duration and hospital stay were significantly shorter in the uniportal group (2 days vs. 3 days, p=0.003 and 4 days [range, 1-14 days] vs. 4 days [range, 1-62 days], p=0.011). The number of dissected lymph nodes tended to be lower in the uniportal group (5 vs. 8, p=0.056).
conclusionOur preliminary experience indicates that uniportal VATS segmentectomy is safe and feasible in well-selected patients. A randomized, prospective study with a large group of patients and long-term follow-up is necessary to confirm these results.
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.