Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33841954›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021

A comparison of non-intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery with spontaneous ventilation and intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis based on 14 randomized controlled trials.

Xi-Xuan Zhang, Chun-Tao Song, Zhen Gao, Bin Zhou, Hai-Bo Wang, Qiang Gong, Ben Li, Qiang Guo, He-Fei Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Xi-Xuan ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Chun-Tao SongDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Zhen GaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Bin ZhouDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Hai-Bo WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Qiang GongDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Ben LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Qiang GuoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
He-Fei LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVideo-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) generally involves endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. However, inevitably, this may cause intubation-related complications and prolong the postoperative recovery process. Gradually, non-intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (NIVATS) is increasingly being utilized. However, its safety and efficacy remain controversial.

methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to August 2020 were selected from the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and included in this study according to the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers screened these RCTs and independently extracted the relevant data. After assessing the risk of bias in these RCTs, a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Pooled data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model.

resultsMeta-analysis data demonstrated that the mean difference (MD) in the length of hospital stay between non-intubated patients and intubated patients was -1.41 days, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of -2.47 to -0.34 (P=0.01). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score between the two groups showed a MD of -0.34 (95% CI: -0.58 to -0.10; P=0.006). Patients who underwent NIVATS presented with lower rates of overall complications [odds ratio (OR) 0.41; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.67; P=0.0004], air leak (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.87; P=0.02), pharyngeal discomfort (OR 0.08; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.17; P<0.00001), hoarseness (OR 0.06; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.21; P<0.00001), and gastrointestinal reactions (OR 0.23; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.53; P=0.0005) compared to intubated patients. The anesthesia satisfaction scores in the NIVATS group were significantly higher than those of the VATS group (MD 0.50; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.88; P=0.009). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the length of operation time (MD 0.90 hours; 95% CI: -0.23 to 2.03; P=0.12) and surgical field satisfaction (1 point) (OR 0.73; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.59; P=0.43) between the two groups.

conclusionsNIVATS is a safe and feasible form of intervention that can reduce the postoperative pain and complications of various systems and shorten hospital stay duration without prolonging the operation time.

Indexed as

length of hospital staymeta-analysisThoracoscopic surgery

Identifiers

PMID33841954
PMCPMC8024812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.