ArticleAnnals of thoracic surgery short reports2024
Robotic Slide Tracheoplasty for Pediatric Tracheal Stenosis in Three-Dimensional Printed and Pig Trachea Models.
Article in Annals of thoracic surgery short reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: Pediatric long-segment tracheal stenosis often requires operative repair with a slide tracheoplasty performed through median sternotomy. We hypothesized that this operation can be performed through a transcervical approach with use of a single-port robotic system. Description: A transcervical single-port robotic slide tracheoplasty was performed in 2 models-a 3-dimensional (3D) printed pediatric tracheal stenosis model and a cadaveric pig trachea model. Evaluation: Single-port robotic slide tracheoplasty was successfully performed in both models. They were large enough that there were minimal issues with limited working space, although mediastinal structures around the trachea were not represented in the models. The advantage of the 3D printed model was the realistic anatomic tracheal stenosis; the advantage of the pig trachea model was the realistic tissue. Conclusions: Transcervical single-port robotic slide tracheoplasty was technically feasible in both our 3D printed and pig trachea models. However, given the limited working space, there are limits to the size of the patient for this technique. Further development is needed before this technique is ready for clinical use.
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.