Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38023124›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

Comparison of robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Shibo Huang, Xiaolong Huang, Zhilong Huang, Raoshan Luo, Weiming Liang

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.6field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. RoboticJournal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Robotic Thoracic Surgery: Current Landscape and Future Directions.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Prehabilitation as a key component of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program in patients with lung cancer: a narrative review.Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shibo Huang *The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Xiaolong Huang *The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Zhilong HuangThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Raoshan LuoThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Weiming LiangThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Guangxi University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Previous studies have compared robot-assisted thoracic surgery(RATS) with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in the treatment of patients with lung cancer, but results were conflicting. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of RATS with VATS in the treatment of patients with lung cancer. Materials and methods: Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials or prospective cohort studies comparing the clinical outcomes of RATS and VATS from inception to 22 July 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Meta-analyses of length of hospital stay, postoperative duration of drainage, postoperative complications, operative time, conversion, estimated blood loss, the number of dissected lymph nodes and stations, 30-day readmission and 30-day mortality were performed. Results: In total 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 614 patients were included, of which 299 patients were treated by RATS and 315 patients treated by VATS. Blood loss was significantly less in RATS group than that in VATS (MD = -17.14, 95% CI -29.96 ~ -4.33, P = 0.009). More nodes stations were dissected in RATS group compared with VATS group(MD= 1.07, 95% CI 0.79 ~ 1.36, P < 0.001). No significant difference occurred between RATS and VATS in length of hospital stay(MD= -0.19, 95% CI -0.98~0.61), readmission(OR=0.74, 95%CI 0.36~1.51, P=0.41), operative time(MD=11.43 95% CI -8.41~31.26, P=0.26), conversion(OR=0.58, 95% CI 0.29~1.17, P=0.13), number of dissected lymph nodes(MD=0.98, 95% CI -0.02~1.97, P=0.05), upstaging rate(OR =0.67, 95% CI 0.38 ~ 1.18, P =0.16, I Conclusion: RATS is a feasible and safe treatment that can achieve better surgical outcomes compared with VATS in terms of short-term outcomes. Except of higher total cost, RATS has obvious advantage in lymphadenectomy and control of intraoperative bleeding. However, large sample and long follow-up randomized clinical trials comparing RATS with VATS are still necessary to better demonstrate the advantages of RATS for lung cancer. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42023446653.

Indexed as

complication5lung cancer3non-small cell lung cancer4robot-assisted thoracic surgery1video-assisted thoracic surgery2

Identifiers

PMID38023124
PMCPMC10646752
OpenAlexW4388023606

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.