ArticleWorld journal of surgery2023
Lobectomy Versus Sublobar Resection in Simultaneous Bilateral Thoracoscopic Lung Resection.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Simultaneous bilateral video-assisted thoracic surgery is safe and feasible for multiple primary lung cancers.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSimultaneous bilateral thoracoscopic lung resection (SBTLR) has been shown to be a feasible and efficacious approach for a wide range of pulmonary conditions. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of different procedures on surgical outcomes in patients receiving SBTLR.
methodsBetween 2012 and 2021, 207 patients with bilateral lung neoplasms who underwent SBTLR were retrospectively reviewed. Fifty-one patients received ipsilateral plus contralateral lobectomy or sublobectomy (lobar group), whilst 156 patients received bilateral sublobectomy (sublobar group). Propensity scores were calculated and matched. Perioperative and clinicopathologic outcomes were compared.
resultsThe lobar group had a greater mean age (64.5 vs. 60.0 years, p = 0.008), longer operative time (254 vs. 205 min, p < 0.001), and more blood loss (74 vs. 46 ml, p < 0.001). The sublobar group had fewer complications (6.4 vs. 19.6%, p = 0.006), shorter hospital stay (4.8 vs. 7.4 days, p < 0.001), and lower hospital costs (p = 0.03). Among 50 pairs of matched groups, significant differences were found only in operative time, hospital stay, and costs. Maximum tumor size and pathological features differed significantly before and after matching (all p < 0.05), with the lobar group consistently demonstrating a larger main tumor (median, 2.5 cm) and a higher percentage of primary lung cancer (84%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that a longer operative time was the factor associated with more complications (OR: 1.01; 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p = 0.002).
conclusionsWith regard to SBTLR, our data suggests that sublobectomy may reduce the prolonged recovery, hospital costs, and complications incurred by lobectomy, without compromising oncological outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37266699What 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.