Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37497221›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2023

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy: a single-center retrospective study.

Hanbo Pan, Ningyuan Zou, Yu Tian, Hongda Zhu, Jiaqi Zhang, Weiqiu Jin, Zenan Gu, Junwei Ning, Ziming Li, Weicheng Kong and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Current state of evidence for RATS lobectomy for NSCLC.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hanbo PanDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ningyuan ZouDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yu TianDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hongda ZhuDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jiaqi ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Weiqiu JinDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zenan GuDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Junwei NingDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ziming LiDepartment of Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Weicheng KongDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Long JiangDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jia HuangDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Qingquan LuoDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, Shanghai Lung Cancer Center, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNShanghai Chest Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy has been increasingly applied to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the comparison between robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the feasibility and oncological efficacy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy is scarce. This study aims to assess the superiorities of RATS over (VATS) concerning short-term outcomes in treating NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy. Methods: NSCLC patients receiving RATS or VATS lobectomy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy at Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2019 to 2022 were retrospectively identified. Baseline clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival profiles were analyzed. Results: Forty-six NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy were included and divided into the RATS (n=15) and VATS (n=31) groups. The baseline clinical characteristics and induction-related adverse events were comparable between the two groups (all p>0.050). The 30-day mortality in the RATS and VATS groups were 0% and 3.23%, respectively (p=1.000). Patients undergoing RATS were associated with reduced surgical-related intensive unit care (ICU) stay than those receiving VATS (0.0 [0.0-0.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-1.0] days, p=0.026). Moreover, RATS assessed more N1 LNs (6.27 ± 1.94 vs 4.90 ± 1.92, p=0.042) and LN stations (3.07 ± 1.03 vs 2.52 ± 0.57, p=0.038) compared with VATS. By comparison, no difference was found in surgical outcomes, pathological results, and postoperative complications between the RATS and VATS groups (all p>0.050). Finally, RATS and VATS achieved comparable one-year recurrence-free survival (82.96% vs. 85.23%, p=0.821) and the timing of central nervous system, LN, and bone recurrences (all p>0.050). Conclusion: RATS is safe and feasible for NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy, reducing surgical-related ICU stay, assessing increased N1 LNs and stations, and achieving similar survival profiles to VATS.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsRoboticsChinaHumansNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesThoracic Surgery, Video-Assistedneoadjuvant immunochemotherapynon-small cell lung cancerperioperative outcomesrecurrence-free survivalrobot-assisted thoracoscopic surgeryvideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

Identifiers

PMID37497221
PMCPMC10366598
OpenAlexW4383913857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.