Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35108265›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

RAVAL trial: Protocol of an international, multi-centered, blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing robotic-assisted versus video-assisted lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer.

Yogita S Patel, Waël C Hanna, Christine Fahim, Yaron Shargall, Thomas K Waddell, Kazuhiro Yasufuku, Tiago N Machuca, Mauricio Pipkin, Jean-Marc Baste, Feng Xie and 3 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

NCT02617186 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Robotic Lobectomy vs. Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Early Stage Lung Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSt. Joseph's Healthcare HamiltonRan2016 to 2031Enrolled446ConditionsNon-small Cell Lung Cancer, Thoracic SurgeryArmsVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, Robotic thoracic surgery
NCT06038227 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Comparing Outcomes for Minimally Invasive Techniques for Anatomic Lung Resection for Cancer - A Prospective, Comparative, Non-randomized, Open Label Post-market Observational Cohort Study Within Europe

TypeobservationalSponsorIntuitive SurgicalRan2023 to 2027Enrolled512ConditionsLung CancerArmsRobotic Assisted Thoracic Surgery, Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. RoboticJournal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Robotic Thoracic Surgery: Current Landscape and Future Directions.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Non-small-cell lung cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Yogita S PatelDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7585-1358
Waël C HannaDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Christine FahimDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Yaron ShargallDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Thomas K WaddellDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kazuhiro YasufukuDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Tiago N MachucaDivision of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Mauricio PipkinDivision of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Jean-Marc BasteDivision of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rouen Normandy University, Rouen Cedex, France.
Feng XieDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Andrea ShiwcharanFunding Reform and Case Costing, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Gary FosterDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Lehana ThabaneDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
McMaster University · CAUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of Toronto · CASt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton · CAUniversité de Rouen Normandie · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetrospective data demonstrates that robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery provides many benefits, such as decreased postoperative pain, lower mortality, shorter length of stay, shorter chest tube duration, and reductions in the incidence of common postoperative pulmonary complications, when compared to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Despite the potential benefits of robotic surgery, there are two major barriers against its widespread adoption in thoracic surgery: lack of high-quality prospective data, and the perceived higher cost of it. Therefore, in the face of these barriers, a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing robotic- to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is needed. The RAVAL trial is a two-phase, international, multi-centered, blinded, parallel, randomized controlled trial that is comparing robotic- to video-assisted lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer that has been enrolling patients since 2016.

methodsThe RAVAL trial will be conducted in two phases: Phase A will enroll 186 early-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients who are candidates for minimally invasive pulmonary lobectomy; while Phase B will continue to recruit until 592 patients are enrolled. After consent, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either robotic- or video-assisted lobectomy, and blinded to the type of surgery they are allocated to. Health-related quality of life questionnaires will be administered at baseline, postoperative day 1, weeks 3, 7, 12, months 6, 12, 18, 24, and years 3, 4, 5. The primary objective of the RAVAL trial is to determine the difference in patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes between the robotic- and video-assisted lobectomy groups at 12 weeks. Secondary objectives include determining the differences in cost-effectiveness, and in the 5-year survival data between the two arms. The results of the primary objective will be reported once Phase A has completed accrual and the 12-month follow-ups are completed. The results of the secondary objectives will be reported once Phase B has completed accrual and the 5-year follow-ups are completed. DISCUSSION: If successfully completed, the RAVAL Trial will have studied patient-reported outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and survival of robotic- versus video-assisted lobectomy in a prospective, randomized, blinded fashion in an international setting.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02617186. Registered 22-September-2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02617186.

Indexed as

AdultCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLung NeoplasmsLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedMulticenter Studies as TopicNeoplasm StagingPostoperative PeriodQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRobotic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID35108265
PMCPMC8809527
OpenAlexW4210389415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.