ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Implementation of a robotic-assisted thoracic surgery program for anatomical lung resections, a single surgeon's experience.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) for pulmonary resections has been reported to be a safe and feasible method with similar outcomes to those of video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). In 2021 our department launched a RATS program. The aims of this study are to evaluate the initial results and learning curve of a series of RATS procedures performed by a single surgeon experienced in uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (uVATS) during an initial period of access to the robotic platform limited to two cases per week. Methods: A retrospective study including consecutive RATS and uVATS lobectomies performed by a single surgeon from November 2021 to September 2023 at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Endpoints were days with chest tube (CT), length of stay (LOS) and intraoperative learning curve as reflected in the duration of procedures. Results: A total of 82 RATS and 60 uVATS consecutive lobectomies were included. Preoperative demographics were similar in the RATS and uVATS groups. Preoperative assessment of tumour size from computed tomography scans were larger in the uVATS group than in the RATS group [25 (18.00-39.00) Conclusions: RATS is a feasible method for lobectomy and can be efficiently introduced as a standard surgical approach even with limited access to the robotic surgical platform, with a learning curve of approximately 44 cases.
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.