ArticleMediastinum (Hong Kong, China)2020
Thoracic redo-robotic surgery (TRRS): a case series of a single centre.
Article in Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Re-do robot-assisted salvage lobectomy after esophagectomy with gastric pull-up reconstruction: a case report.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted lobectomy after bilateral lung transplantation.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic-assisted thoracic surgery has been shown as a safe and feasible surgical procedure to treat a broad range of thoracic malignancies with a shorten hospital stay, a quicker return to normal daily activities and superior quality of life compared to open approach. Nonetheless, its utilization has predominantly been restricted to the average surgical intervention. In the latest years, given the technological improvements and the advanced skills of the "robotic" surgeons, this approach has been applied to more complex and challenging procedures (e.g., advanced stages/ after neoadjuvant therapies). The aim of this study is to show the results and the advantages of redo thoracic procedures performed with a robot-assisted approach.
methodsRetrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database (2017-2019). We analysed the first case series undergoing robotic approach (totally endoscopic) in patients who underwent previous surgery and/or radiotherapy for thoracic malignancies.
resultsNine patients (M/F =5/4) with a median age of 73 years underwent robotic procedures after previous radical surgery (n=6) or radiation therapy treatment (n=3). The mean time interval between the two interventions was 96.12 months (range, 7-444 months). The conversion rate was 0%. No postoperative death occurred. Only one complication arose (air leaking) treated conservatively. The median length of stay and chest tube duration were 5 days (range, 4-10 days) and 2 days (range, 2-5 days). The 30-, 60- and 90-day mortality was 0%. With a median follow-up of 10 months (range, 2-12 months), all patients are currently alive, disease free, and with an overall survival and a disease-free survival of 10 months.
conclusionsThe robotic surgery is a safe and feasible approach in case of redo-robotic surgery, showing good outcomes, permitting a fast return to full daily activity, and enabling the patients to rapidly undergo adjuvant treatments, when required.
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.