Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40118360›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2025

Robotic Lung Transplantation: Feasibility, Initial Experience, and 3-Year Outcomes.

Dominic Emerson, Dominick Megna, Allen A Razavi, Laura DiChiacchio, Jad Malas, Reinaldo Rampolla, Joanna Chikwe, Pedro Catarino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Sternal Complications After Clamshell Surgery for (Heart-)Lung Transplantation-A Systematic Literature Review.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Totally Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Lung Transplantation: A Case Series.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Robotic-Assisted Vascular Surgery: A Clinical Perspective.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Dominic EmersonDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: dominic.emerson@cshs.org.
Dominick MegnaDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Allen A RazaviDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Laura DiChiacchioDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Jad MalasDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Reinaldo RampollaDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Comprehensive Transplant Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Joanna ChikweDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Pedro CatarinoDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.

Funding

Training in Advanced Heart Disease ResearchT32HL116273 · NHLBI · CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER · PI Joshua I Goldhaber, EDUARDO MARBAN · 2013 to 2026
$5.6M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL116273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung transplantation is performed through clamshell or sternotomy incisions, which may contribute to morbidity and limit patient eligibility. Robotic lung transplantation offers a less-invasive alternative, but data informing treatment choice are limited. This study was therefore designed to evaluate midterm outcomes of robotic and minimally invasive lung transplantation.

methodsConsecutive patients undergoing robotic or minimally invasive lung transplant (defined by <6-cm minithoracotomy) from October 2021 to February 2025 were included in a prospective registry. The primary end point was 1-year survival. A linear mixed-effects regression model compared postoperative pulmonary function. Median follow-up time was 1.8 years (interquartile range, 1-4 years).

resultsDuring the study period, 209 lung transplants, including 111 (53.1%) minimally invasive (21 robotic [10%] and 90 nonrobotic [43.1%]), were performed at a single center. Three patients were converted from robotic to nonrobotic approaches. The robotic cohort had similar risk factors and lung allocation scores but longer median waiting list times (50 days vs 22.5 days, P = .02) compared with nonrobotic minimally invasive recipients, and mean ischemic time was 486 minutes vs 406 minutes (P = .02), respectively. There were no significant differences in postoperative ventilator support <48 hours (76.2% vs 75.6%, P = .79), early severe primary graft dysfunction (4.8% vs 8.9%, P = .53), hospital stay (14.1 vs 14.3 days, P = .95), postoperative pulmonary function, or 1-year unadjusted survival (95.0% vs 95.5%, log-rank P = .84) in robotic compared with nonrobotic minimally invasive recipients.

conclusionsThis experience with robotic lung transplantation suggests it is associated with midterm outcomes similar to nonrobotic lung transplantation, despite longer ischemic times.

Indexed as

Lung TransplantationRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresProspective StudiesRegistriesSurvival RateTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40118360
PMCPMC13132875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.