ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2024
Efficacy of the da Vinci robot versus thoracoscopic surgery for patients with mediastinal tumors of different body mass index: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Robot‑assisted thoracoscopic surgery for pediatric mediastinal tumors: a 5‑year experience with 168 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Early clinical experience with a novel single-port robotic system for mediastinal tumor resection: A feasibility and safety assessment.JTCVS techniques · 2026Article
- RoboticJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a predictive model for intraoperative hypothermia in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a retrospective study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Efficacy of an Intelligent Closed-Loop Warming System in Preventing Perioperative Hypothermia and Improving Recovery in Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for the treatment of patients with mediastinal tumors of different body mass indices (BMI).
methodsA retrospective cohort study was used to collect 260 patients with mediastinal tumors admitted to three medical centers in China from December 2020 to March 2024. These patients underwent mediastinal tumor resection by RATS (n = 125) or VATS (n = 135). Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed for the both groups, and further, the patients were divided into the N-BMI group (18.5 kg/m
resultsThe RATS group had more advantages than the VATS group in terms of intraoperative blood loss, total postoperative drainage, postoperative drainage time, and postoperative hospital stay. As for hospitalization costs, the VATS group was more advantageous. In the H-BMI group, subgroup analysis showed a statistically significant difference in shorter operative time and lower incidence of postoperative complications in the RATS group.
conclusionRATS has technical and short-term efficacy advantages in comparison with VATS, although it has the drawback of high costs associated with the treatment of mediastinal tumors. In the patients with mediastinal tumors of H-BMI, RATS can achieve better short-term outcomes and safety, especially in the reduction of the incidence of postoperative complications.
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.