ArticleIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2021
Long-term outcome in mediastinal malignancies: video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open surgery.
Article in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere are not many studies comparing long-term oncological outcomes between video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open surgery for mediastinal malignancies. This study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of these two techniques in the treatment of mediastinal malignancies.
methodsThis is a retrospective study: patients with mediastinal malignancies underwent VATS or open surgery from 2010 to 2013 and were followed until 2019. The primary endpoints were long-term oncological outcomes, including tumor recurrence and mortality. Secondary endpoints were perioperative outcomes (operative duration, blood loss, pain, chest drainage duration, hospital length of stay, and complications).
resultsThere were 36 patients in the VATS group and 49 patients in the open group. The median follow-up duration was 90 months. VATS significantly reduced operation time (84.6 versus 124.8 min), blood loss (59.8 versus 235.2 ml), postoperative pain score (4.9 versus 6.7), the duration of chest tube drainage (2.1 versus 3.1 days), and postoperative hospital stay (5.2 versus 8.0 days). The two groups were comparable regarding the recurrence rate (2.4 versus 2.1/100 person-years) and mortality rate (0.8 versus 0.9/100 person-years).
conclusionCompared with open surgery, VATS is less traumatic, reduces postoperative chest drainage, and shortens hospital stay with comparable long-term oncological outcomes. We advocate the VATS approach as a favored option for the resection of mediastinal malignancies.
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.