ArticleSurgery today2025
Lobectomy for primary lung cancer: a comparison of perioperative and postoperative outcomes between robot-assisted thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracic surgery.
Article in Surgery today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Textbook outcome after minimally invasive pulmonary resection for clinical stage I lung cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- The expert consensus document on minimally invasive upper lobectomy for lung cancer in China.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Initial surgical results of subcostal uniportal robotic lung resection: a study of the perioperative outcomes and a CUSUM analysis of the learning curve.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted, laparoscopic or thoracoscopic, and open surgery across 13 cancer operations: a single-institution cohort of 36,208 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Potential bias in the clinical trial registration of patients with peripheral small-sized non-small cell lung cancer: Real-world data in the era of segmentectomy.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Early clinical outcomes of anatomical lung resection for primary lung cancer using the hinotori™ surgical robot system: a single-institution prospective observational study of perioperative outcomes in 36 cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- RoboticJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Article
- Benchmarking Large Language Models Using a Best Evidence Topic Report in a Patient With Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis focusing on real-world clinical studies in the past 10 years.Frontiers in oncology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study compared the peri- and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for primary lung cancer.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent RATS or VATS at Nagoya University Hospital between April 2018 and March 2022. Propensity score matching was used to balance patient characteristics between the two groups. The following long-term outcomes were assessed: the 3-year overall survival (OS), causes of death, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence patterns. Various peri- and postoperative outcomes were examined as short-term outcomes.
resultsAfter propensity score-matching, 137 patients were included in each group. RATS was associated with a longer operative time (median 180 vs. 144 min, p < 0.001), less blood loss (median 5 vs. 12 ml, p = 0.005), and a lower rate of conversion to open thoracotomy (1 [0.7%] vs. 10 [7.4%], p = 0.010) than VATS. The 3-year OS and DFS were comparable between the groups.
conclusionIn lobectomy for lung cancer, RATS demonstrated long-term outcomes that were comparable to those of VATS. Although RATS has a longer operative time, it is associated with less blood loss and a lower conversion rate to open thoracotomy than VATS, suggesting that it is a beneficial surgical approach for patients.
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.