ArticleIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2020
A community hospital's experience with robotic thoracic surgery.
Article in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 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.
- Exploring and analyzing learning curves in robotic-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical lung resections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.JTCVS open · 2025Article
- The learning curve of the robotic-assisted lobectomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 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
introductionThe emergence of minimally invasive thoracic surgery has positively impacted postoperative recovery. Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has been shown to have equivalent short- and long-term outcomes as compared with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). The introduction of RATS offers a three-dimensional high-definition image, improved ergonomics, and wristed movement. The purpose of this paper was to define the learning curve of RATS.
methodsThis study is a retrospective review of a single surgeon's RATS experience in a community hospital. All patients who underwent RATS between December 2011 and April 2014 were included. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: "early" and "late." These groups were created based on the date before or after February 2013, respectively. Data is presented as means and percentages. Significance was defined as a
resultsSeventy-nine patients were identified with a mean age of 59. There were 39 patients in the early group and 40 in the late. Rates of conversion to open thoracotomy (13% vs 10%,
conclusionBased on our experience, the complexity of the operations that can be performed robotically increased with the number of operations performed without an impact on postoperative morbidity and mortality.
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.