ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2020
Effect of operative approach on quality of life following anatomic lung cancer resection.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early clinical outcomes of anatomical lung resection for primary lung cancer using the hinotori™ surgical robot system: a single-institution prospective observational study of perioperative outcomes in 36 cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- The effect of lobar versus sublobar video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lung resection on patient quality of life.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Quality of Life Evaluation Before and After Pulmonary Lobe Resection for Benign Diseases: A Comparative Study Among Patients with Tuberculosis, Bronchiectasis, and Benign Lung Nodules.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of Quality of Life after Robotic, Video-Assisted, and Open Surgery for Lung Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Multimodal evaluation of locoregional anaesthesia efficacy on postoperative pain after robotic pulmonary lobectomy for NSCLC: a pilot study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Management of middle lobe veins during single-portal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy via the fifth intercostal approach (case series): why the subcarinal triangular right base angle is helpful.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Quality of Life After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy or Surgery for Early-Stage NSCLC: A Systematic Review.JTO clinical and research reports · 2022Review
- Comparison of Postoperative Quality of Life and Pain with and without a Metal Rib Spreader in Patients Undergoing Lobectomy through Axillary Mini-Thoracotomy for Stage I Lung Cancer.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2022Observational
- The Role of Surgery in Lung Cancer Treatment: Present Indications and Future Perspectives-State of the Art.Cancers · 2021Review
- Estimating the risk of conversion from video-assisted thoracoscopic lung surgery to thoracotomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Article
- Patient-reported outcomes in thoracic surgery-opportunities and current challenges.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after lung cancer surgery are of increasing interest to patients and clinicians. A variety of studies have investigated the impact of the surgical approach on quality of life (QOL) after surgery for early non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our aim is to review the current evidence on how minimally-invasive approaches, including video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS), versus open thoracotomy for lung cancer affect QOL. We conducted a systematic review of the literature of studies comparing QOL after VATS/RATS versus thoracotomy approach using studies published before 2019 on PubMed and Google Scholar. Studies were assessed for differences in QOL by domains. Fifteen studies met our inclusion criteria including 14 observational studies and one randomized trial. Survey instruments and timing of QOL assessments differed between all studies. A thoracoscopic (VATS or RATS) approach was associated with better general health (3/10 studies), physical functioning (9/14 studies), social functioning (1/12 studies), mental health (3/13 studies), emotional role functioning (4/12 studies), physical role functioning (7/12 studies), and bodily pain (7/12 studies) as compared to open surgery. The open thoracotomy approach was associated with better general health and mental health in one study each. Although QOL assessment in current studies is highly variable, the existing evidence suggests that a thoracoscopic approach is associated with improved QOL, particularly in the areas of physical functioning and pain as compared to open lung cancer surgery.
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.