ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Feasibility of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery as a redo chest approach for lung resection in patients with a history of surgical procedures on the same side.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Second primary lung cancer and treatment strategy after lobectomyJournal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery as redo approach after prior open lobectomy: is it safely feasible?-challenges and pitfalls of a complex surgical technique.Journal of visualized surgery · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Thoracic surgeons are increasingly facing situations for which patients are eligible for iterative thoracic surgery. With growing experience in minimally invasive thoracic surgery, the question of the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive redo procedure is rising. Our study aims to report the results of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) as surgical approach for reintervention after a previous ipsilateral intrathoracic surgery. Methods: This retrospective monocentric observational study required review of medical files of patients undergoing minimally invasive ipsilateral redo surgery between 2018 and 2023. Operative data, morbidity, and mortality were studied. Results: Thirty-eight patients underwent redo-VATS for pulmonary resection. Of these, 22 (57.9%) were males, with a mean age of 66±12.2 years. Primary procedures included lung cancer resection (n=32, 84%) [lobectomy (n=8, 21.1%), segmentectomy (n=4, 10.5%), wedge resection (n=20, 52.6%)], lung transplantation (n=2, 5.3%), esophagectomy (n=1, 2.6%), thoracic aortic bypass (n=1, 2.6%), empyema (n=1, 2.6%), and chemical pleurodesis (n=1, 2.6%). The median duration between surgeries was 30 (range, 2-99) months. Redo-VATS resection included lobectomy (n=21, 55.3%), segmentectomy (n=3, 7.9%), and wedge resection (n=14, 36.8%). The median operating time was 153 (range, 30-287) min. Intraoperative blood loss was less than 200 mL in 34 (89.5%) cases. The conversion rate was 13.2% secondary to pulmonary artery injuries (n=2) and difficulties in dissection and exposure (n=3). Thirty-day mortality was 0%. Median chest drainage time was 3 (range, 1-37) days, median hospital stay was 5 (range, 3-24) days. Conclusions: redo-VATS lung tumor resection has been demonstrated as a safe and feasible approach with an acceptable conversion risk and morbidity. These encouraging results should question the indication for a systematic open surgical approach in this situation.
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.