SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Open thoracotomy versus VATS versus RATS for segmentectomy: a systematic review & Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical lung resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Perioperative outcomes and nodal station assessment after robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic segmentectomy for early-stage NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Prevalence and risk factors for postoperative atrial fibrillation following pulmonary resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery for resectable lung cancer: efficacy, safety and surgical approaches - an umbrella review of meta-analyses.BMC surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Complex lung segmentectomy: comparative perioperative outcomes of robotic and video-assisted approaches.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic vs thoracoscopic vs open lobectomy and segmentectomy for lung cancer: a multicenter cohort study in the ATS of Milan.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Updated Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery segmentectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: indications and surgical technique.Journal of visualized surgery · 2026Article
- Refining Surgical Standards: The Role of Robotic-Assisted Segmentectomy in Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2025Review
- Predictors of Postoperative Pneumonia Following Anatomical Lung Resections in Thoracic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Identifying risk factors and pathogens in postoperative pneumonia after lung surgery for cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for cardiothoracic surgeons: part 7 - synthesizing evidence.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Article
- From Scopes to Bots: The Clinical Journey from VATS to RATS.Annals of cardiac anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Segmental bronchial marking method using indocyanine green for safe thoracoscopic segmentectomy: a single-center early experience.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent trials suggest that more conservative resections such as segmentectomy are non-inferior to more radical approaches. Most segmentectomy can be safely performed using video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). The clinical benefits of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) remain unclear. We aimed to perform a systematic review evaluating the outcome of open thoracotomy, VATS, and RATS for segmentectomy.
methodsA systematic database search was conducted of original articles exploring the outcome of open versus VATS versus RATS segmentectomy in PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission, air leak, and post-operative pneumonia respectively.
results11 studies were included with a total patient sample size of 7280. There were no differences between the three approaches in terms of 30-day mortality, hospital readmission, air leak, and post-operative pneumonia.
conclusionThere are no significant differences between the three approaches in the clinical outcomes measured. While our analysis demonstrates the potential benefits of RATS, it is important to note that the steep learning curve associated with this technique may impact its wider adoption and efficacy in the community. Further randomised control studies are required to compare the short and long terms results of VATS and RATS approaches.
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.