Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36582973›Full record

ReviewMediastinum (Hong Kong, China)2022

Surgical approaches to mediastinal cysts: clinical practice review.

Diana S Hsu, Kian C Banks, Jeffrey B Velotta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Diana S HsuUCSF East Bay Surgery, Highland Hospital, Oakland, CA, USA.
Kian C BanksUCSF East Bay Surgery, Highland Hospital, Oakland, CA, USA.
Jeffrey B VelottaDepartment of Surgery, Kaiser Permanente Oakland Medical Center, Oakland, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The traditional approach to mediastinal cyst and mass resection has been open via median sternotomy or thoracotomy. With the advent of minimally invasive techniques, there have been successful cases completed via video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) and robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS). Although mediastinal cysts are uncommon, they are a significant and relevant topic in the practice of thoracic surgery. Thus, this clinical practice review aims to summarize and highlight some of the key case series and retrospective studies in order to provide insight on each of the approaches. In addition, there is a brief review of other approaches, such as subxiphoid, and the utility of endobronchial ultrasound in the management of mediastinal cysts. In this review, the identified benefits of VATS and RATS lie largely in quality improvement of the patient experience-decreased length of stay (LOS) and pain-without compromising patient outcomes. However, the open approach remains a viable option, particularly for the management of large cysts or as a bail-out option. When surgeons approach with VATS or RATS and encounter bleeding or difficult dissection planes, it is consistent in the literature that conversion to thoracotomy is the safe next step. Our clinical practice is to attempt VATS or RATS approach for mediastinal cysts when possible. The data used for this review relies heavily on case reports and case series, and thus is the main limitation of this clinical practice review.

Indexed as

Mediastinal cystminimally invasive approachopen approach

Identifiers

PMID36582973
PMCPMC9792838

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.