ArticleMedicine2020
Feasibility and effectiveness of thoracoscopic pulmonary segmentectomy for non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Efficacy of Different Thoracoscopic Surgeries for Patients With Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Uniportal VATS approach to sub-lobar anatomic resections: literature review and personal experience.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2022-01-14Error in Analyses · Error in Data · Results Not Reproducible ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The outcomes of minimally invasive thoracoscopic pulmonary segmentectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) still need to be defined. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of thoracoscopic pulmonary segmentectomy in patients with early peripheral NSCLC.This was a retrospective study of patients with early peripheral NSCLC admitted between January 2013 and January 2017. Patients were divided into the segmentectomy and lobectomy groups (40/group), according to the surgery they underwent. Blood loss, operation time, removal of drainage tube time, inflammatory response after operation, postoperative complications, postoperative lung function, local recurrence, and survival were compared.Blood loss and removal of drainage tube time were not significantly different between the 2 groups (all P > .05). Operation time in the segmentectomy group was longer than in the lobectomy group (P < .001). The postoperative interleukin-6, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein changes in the segmentectomy group were significantly lower than in the lobectomy group (all P < .001). The pulmonary function at 2 weeks was significantly reduced in the 2 groups (all P < .001), but it was better in the segmentectomy group than in the lobectomy group (all P < .05). The 1- and 3-year local recurrence disease-free, and overall survival rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > .05). The multivariable analysis could not identify any factor associated with local recurrence or survival (all P > .05).Thoracoscopic pulmonary segmentectomy and lobectomy are both acceptable for the treatment of early peripheral NSCLC, but segmentectomy was associated with lower postoperative inflammation and better postoperative pulmonary function than lobectomy.
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.