ArticleBMC surgery2023
A comparative study of robotic surgery and thoracoscopic surgery for mediastinal cysts.
Article in BMC surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative meta-analysis of robot- and video-assisted surgery for thymoma: efficacy, learning curve, and economic burden in 7347 patients.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy of thoracoscopy and robotic surgery in the treatment of mediastinal tumors.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- A review of robotic-assisted mediastinal surgery in the pediatric population.Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China) · 2026Review
- Learning curve for full-port robot-assisted mediastinal mass resection: a single-centre retrospective study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the treatment of mediastinal cysts.
methodsRetrospective analysis on clinical data of 70 cases of minimally invasive surgery for mediastinal cysts completed in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Gansu Provincial People's Hospital from April 2014 to December 2022. There were 34 cases in the RATS group with a cyst diameter of (3.70 ± 1.16) cm and 36 cases in the VATS group with a cyst diameter of (4.07 ± 1.20) cm. All cysts were evaluated preoperatively using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or chest computed tomography (CT) localization. Surgery-related indices were compared among the two groups.
resultsAll patients in two groups successfully completed resection of mediastinal cysts without perioperative deaths. Compared with the VATS group, the RATS group possessed shorter operative time [(75.32 ± 17.80) min vs. (102.22 ± 19.80) min, P < 0.001], lesser intraoperative bleeding [10 (5.00, 26.00) ml vs. 17.50 (5.00, 50.50) ml, P = 0.009], shorter postoperative chest drainage time [2 (1.00, 6.00) ml vs. 3 (2.00, 6.50) ml, P = 0.006] and shorter postoperative hospital stay [3 (2.00, 6.50) d vs. 4 (3.00, 7.50) d, P = 0.001]. There was no statistically significant discrepancy in intermediate openings and complications in both groups (P > 0.05).
conclusionCompared with VATS, RATS is safety and effectivity in the treatment of mediastinal cysts and thus has advantages in operative time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative chest drainage time and postoperative hospital stay.
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.