ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2020
Mortality for Robotic- vs Video-Assisted Lobectomy-Treated Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of robotic and video assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer across key outcomes.iScience · 2026Article
- Article
- Benchmarking Large Language Models Using a Best Evidence Topic Report in a Patient With Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Beyond the platform: why surgical quality and surgeon proficiency outweigh the RATS vs. VATS debate in early-stage lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Long-term outcomes of robotic versus video-assisted pulmonary lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reconstructed patient data.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Article
- Robot- vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Early Lung Cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo address the US Food and Drug Administration's recent safety concern on robotic surgery procedures, we compared short- and long-term mortality for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated by robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgical lobectomy (RATS-L) vs video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical lobectomy (VATS-L).
methodsFrom the National Cancer Database, we identified 18 908 stage I NSCLC patients who underwent RATS-L or VATS-L as the primary operation from 2010 to 2014. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for short- and long-term mortality using unmatched and propensity score-matched analyses. All statistical tests were 2-sided.
resultsPatients treated by RATS-L had higher 90-day mortality than those with VATS-L (6.6% vs 3.8%,
conclusionsPatients with small (≤20 mm) stage I NSCLC treated with RATS-L had statistically significantly higher long-term mortality risk than VATS-L after 1 year postsurgery.
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.