ArticleSurgery today2024
Factors affecting the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lung cancer.
Article in Surgery today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ninjin'yoeito improves respiratory symptoms after lung cancer surgery: a prospective randomized study.Surgery today · 2025Trial
- Textbook outcome after minimally invasive pulmonary resection for clinical stage I lung cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Clinical performance of da Vinci 5 versus Xi for robotic anatomic lung resection: a propensity-weighted analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Learning curve of consolers and bedside surgeons fused robotic-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy: insights from the initial 100 cases.Surgery today · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) is a relatively new approach to lung cancer surgery. To promote the development of RATS procedures, we investigated the factors related to short-term postoperative outcomes.
methodsWe analyzed the records of patients who underwent RATS lobectomy for primary lung cancer at our institution between June, 2018 and January, 2023. The primary outcome was operative time, and the estimated value of surgery-related factors was calculated by linear regression analysis. The secondary outcome was surgical morbidity and the risk was assessed by logistic regression analysis.
resultsThe study cohort comprised 238 patients. Left upper lobectomy had the longest mean operative time, followed by right upper lobectomy. Postoperative complications occurred in 13.0% of the patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that upper lobectomy, the number of staples used for interlobular fissures, and the number of cases experienced by the surgeon were significantly associated with a longer operative time. The only significant risk factor for postoperative complications was heavy smoking.
conclusionPatients with well-lobulated middle or lower lobe lung cancer who are not heavy smokers are recommended for the introductory period of RATS lobectomy. Improving the procedures for upper lobectomy and dividing incomplete interlobular fissures will promote the further development of RATS.
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.