ArticleThoracic cancer2023
One-lung ventilation in obese patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rescue Surgery for Advanced Stage Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review.Thoracic cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of obesity on perioperative outcomes following lung cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Lung cancer and obesity: A contentious relationship (Review).Oncology reports · 2024Review
- Application value of using a SaCo videolaryngeal mask airway combined with a bronchial blocker in patients undergoing minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- One-lung ventilation in obese patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 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
21 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated the safety and feasibility of one-lung ventilation in obese patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy and whether obesity affected peri- and postoperative outcomes.
methodsThis was a retrospective single center study including consecutive patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy between October 2019 and February 2022. Obese patients were statistically compared to a control group to evaluate any differences in relation to one-lung ventilation and peri- and postoperative outcomes.
resultsOur study population included 111 patients; of these, 26 (23%) were included in the obese group, while 85 (77%) were included within the nonobese group. To obtain one-lung ventilation in nonobese patients, a double-lumen tube was more frequently used than a single-lumen tube with bronchial blocker (61% vs. 39%; p = 0.02), while in obese patients a single-lumen tube with bronchial blocker was used more than a double-lumen tube (81% vs. 19%, p = 0.001). Intergroup comparison showed that a double-lumen tube was the preferred method in nonobese patients, while a single-lumen tube with bronchial blockers was the strategy of choice in obese patients (p = 0.0002). Intubation time was longer in the obese group than in the nonobese group (94.0 ± 6.1 vs. 85.0 ± 7.0 s; p = 0.0004) and failure rate of first attempt at intubation was higher in the obese group (23% vs. 5%; p = 0.01). Obesity was not associated with increased intra-, peri- and postoperative complications and/or mortality.
conclusionsOne-lung ventilation is a feasible and safe procedure also in obese patients and obesity did not negatively affect peri- and postoperative outcomes after lung resection.
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.