ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021
A meta-analysis of minimally invasive surgery versus thoracotomy for centrally located non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-based prediction of 30-day unplanned readmission risk in day surgery lung cancer patients after lobectomy or sublobectomy: a real-world study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Podcast on Pre- or Perioperative Chemoimmunotherapy for Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Shared Agreement from the Thoracic Surgeon and Oncologist Perspectives.Oncology and therapy · 2024Article
- Uniportal VATS for Diagnosis and Staging in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery is established as the most effective treatment for central lung cancer. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is gaining popularity. The decision of whether surgical treatment of central lung cancer should be minimally invasive or a conventional thoracotomy is a critical decision for the thoracic surgeon. However, whether MIS is more advantageous than other surgical treatments for central lung cancer. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term results of MIS and conventional thoracotomy in patients with central lung cancer.
methodsThis meta-analysis was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Wiley Online Library, Google Scholar, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases. Searches for relevant studies were conducted in strict accordance with research protocols detailed in the Cochrane handbook. The primary endpoints for comparison between the two surgical methods were perioperative and long-term survival. A 95% confidence interval (CI) for relative risk (RR)/mean difference (MD) was calculated to assess the strength of the correlation.
resultsNine studies that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were eventually included in this meta-analysis. These studies involved a total of 5,869 patients [MIS, n =1,140 versus thoracotomy (TH), n =4,729]. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and the 2-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) were similar for the MIS and TH groups [OR: 0.86 (95% CI: 0.51-1.43); P=0.55; OR: 1.01 (95% CI: 0.43-2.36); P=0.99, OR: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.78-1.05); P=0.18; OR: 0.90 (95% CI: 0.77-1.06); P=0.22; OR: 0.95 (95% CI: 0.25-1.53); P=0.30]. A subgroup analysis of 8 articles revealed no statistical difference in the pathological type of non-small cell lung cancer (squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma) between the two groups [OR: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.89-1.09); P =0.81]. However, the MIS group had a lower incidence of blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and fewer complications [MD: -46.25 (95% CI: -85.05 to -7.46); P=0.02; MD: -1.93 (95% CI: -3.15 to -0.7); P=0.002; MD: 0.73 (95% CI: 0.61-0.88); P=0.001].
conclusionsMIS was shown to be a more effective option to conventional thoracotomy for the treatment of central lung cancer.
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.