ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2023
Analysis of trends in perioperative outcomes in over 1000 robotic-assisted anatomic lung resections.
Review in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Days alive and out of hospital after video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy or segmentectomy for lung cancer: a prospective Chinese cohort study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted lung nodule diagnosis and resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Anastomosis Complications after Bronchoplasty: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Treatment Options Reported by a Referral Cancer Center.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted surgery is gaining popularity as a minimally invasive approach for anatomic lung resection. We investigated the temporal changes in case volume, costs, and postoperative outcomes for robotic-assisted anatomic lung resection in over 1000 cases. We reviewed our institutional STS database for patients who had undergone robotic-assisted lobectomy, bi-lobectomy, or segmentectomy as the primary procedure between years 2009-2021. The patients were divided into two groups: first 500 cases (n = 501) and second 500 cases (n = 500). Temporal trends of case volume, surgical indications, hospital length of stay, costs, and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. A total of 1001 patients were analyzed, of which 968 (96.7%) patients underwent robotic-assisted lobectomy, 21 (2.1%) patients underwent bi-lobectomy, 10 (1.0%) patients underwent segmentectomy, and 3 (0.3%) patients underwent sleeve lobectomy. Primary lung cancer was the most common indication (87.7%), followed by metastatic lung tumors (7.1%), and benign diagnosis (5.2%). The overall postoperative complication rate decreased from 46.1% for the first 500 cases compared to 29.6% for the second 500 cases (p < 0.0001). The median hospital length of stay was down trending, which was 4 days [IQR: 3-7] for the first 500 cases and 3 days [IQR: 3-5] (p = 0.0001) for the second. The inflation-adjusted direct and indirect hospital costs were significantly lower in the second 500 cases (p < 0.0001). The complications rates, hospital costs, and hospital length of stay for robotic-assisted anatomic pulmonary resection decreased significantly over time at a single institution. Continuous improvement in perioperative outcomes may be observed with increasing institutional experience.
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.