ArticleZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2020
[Comparison of the Clinical Effect of Uniportal Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy and Biportal Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy in the Treatment of Lung Cancer].
Article in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 2020. 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.
- Uniportal & biportal robotic anatomic lung resection (without COJournal of visualized surgery · 2024Article
- Efficacy of single- and double-hole thoracoscopic lobectomy for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, the technique of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery has been developed. As a new surgical method, its feasibility and safety have not been generally recognized. The aim of this study is to review the technology in the treatment of lung cancer patients in stage I to part of stage IIIa.
methodsThe clinical data of patients accepted thoracoscopic resection of lung cancer by a same medical group from May 2018 to March 2019 in The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University were retrospectively analyzed. After remove of cases that did not meet the requirements, the patients were divided into uniportal group (55 cases) and biportal group (87 cases). The clinical data of the two groups were collected and statistically analyzed.
resultsAll the 142 patients underwent lobectomy and systemic lymph node dissection. There is no perioperative death in both groups. There was no significant difference in age, location of tumors, pathological type, size of tumors and pathological tumor-node-metastasis (pTNM) staging between uniportal group and biportal group (P>0.05). The operation time [(167.65±43.85) min vs (181.71±51.28) min], the intraoperative bleeding volume [(57.45±50.19) mL vs (87.47±132.54) mL], the indwelling time of drainage tube [(4.82±2.82) d vs (5.84±3.43) d] and the hospital stay [(6.91±3.88) d vs (7.74±3.87) d] were less in uiportal group compared to biportal group, though no significant difference occurred (P>0.05 ). The total drainage volume of uniportal group was significantly lower than that of biportal group [(1,064.82±776.38) mL vs (1,658.71±1,722.38) mL], and the visual analogue score of 24 hours and 72 hours after operation [(4.73±0.73) points vs (5.25±0.74) points; (2.16±0.71) points vs (2.55±0.86) points] were lower in uniportal group (P<0.05).
conclusionsUniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic radical resection of lung cancer is safe and feasible for stage I to part of stage IIIa lung cancer patients.
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.