ArticleBMC cancer2024
Three different surgical methods for large-sized anterior mediastinal tumors in real-world practice.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The surgical approach strategies in the treatment of anterior mediastinal tumors.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Robot-Assisted Resection of Mediastinal Tumors in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Modified subxiphoid uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery with percutaneous suspension technique via balance hook sternal elevation device in anterior mediastinal masses.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Effect of surgical management for anterior mediastinal large mass: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- VATS resection of a large mediastinal teratoma abutting great vessels.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Management of large anterior mediastinal mass by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for a relatively large mediastinal tumor (5.0-10.0 cm) remains controversial. In addition, few studies have focused on comparing different surgical approaches for large mediastinal tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes between subxiphoid approach VATS, intercostal approach VATS, and traditional sternotomy for large-sized anterior mediastinal tumors.
methodsThe study consecutively enrolled 159 patients with large-sized anterior mediastinal tumors (5.0-10.0 cm) who received surgery in our hospital between January 2018 and July 2022 (subxiphoid approach VATS: 52 patients, intercostal approach VATS: 70 patients, traditional sternotomy: 37 patients). We analyzed the clinical baseline data, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and postoperative complications of all patients. Then the patients were further divided into two groups according to whether there was a peripheral organ (such as pericardium, lung, or left innominate vein) invasion: group A, invasion of the surrounding organ, and group B, no invasion of the surrounding organ. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and postoperative complications were also analyzed in group A and group B, respectively.
resultsIn all patients, there were significant differences in blood loss (subxiphoid approach: 33.1 ± 46.0 ml, intercostal approach: 36.9 ± 44.1 ml, sternotomy: 113.0 ± 84.9 ml, P < 0.001) and duration of postoperative oral analgesics (subxiphoid approach: 3.4 ± 0.9 d, intercostal approach: 3.7 ± 1.4 d, sternotomy: 4.5 ± 1.5 d, P = 0.002) among the three methods. In group A, there was a significant difference in blood loss (subxiphoid approach: 50.0 ± 67.7 ml, intercostal approach: 90.0 ± 66.6 ml, sternotomy: 157.9 ± 90.2 ml, P < 0.001) among the three methods. In group B, there were significant differences in the duration of postoperative oral analgesics (subxiphoid approach: 3.2 ± 0.8 d, intercostal approach: 3.7 ± 1.4 d, sternotomy: 4.2 ± 1.1 d, P < 0.05) and blood loss (subxiphoid approach: 22.5 ± 19.3 ml, intercostal approach: 31.9 ± 38.5 ml, sternotomy: 65.6 ± 44.9 ml, P < 0.001) between the three methods. There were no significant differences in the postoperative complications.
conclusionsVATS is an effective, minimally invasive, and safe procedure for large-sized anterior mediastinal tumors (5.0-10.0 cm) without an invasion of the surrounding organs, and maybe a feasible and secure method for large-sized anterior mediastinal tumors with an invasion of the surrounding organ (such as the pericardium, lung, or left innominate vein). Subxiphoid approach VATS is a less invasive procedure than intercostal approach VATS and traditional sternotomy due to its reduced blood loss and postoperative pain.
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.