ArticleBMJ open2025
Robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy for stage I-II thymic epithelial tumour: a protocol for the first multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06654830 (Robotic-assisted Versus Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Thymectomy for Thymic Epithelial Tumor in Stage I-II), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Robotic-assisted Versus Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Thymectomy for Thymic Epithelial Tumor in Stage I-II: a Prospective, Multi-center, Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evolving paradigms in thymoma surgery and multidisciplinary care: a narrative review.Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive approaches, including video-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy (VATT) and robot-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy (RATT), have emerged as alternatives to median sternotomy for resectable thymic epithelial tumours (TETs). However, their comparative clinical efficacy remains inconclusive due to limited prospective evidence. This phase II randomised controlled trial aims to provide the first direct comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes between RATT and VATT in stage I-II TETs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This phase II clinical trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled study. A total of 100 patients with stage I-II TETs will be recruited and randomly allocated into two groups: RATT and VATT groups, with a 1:1 ratio. Follow-up visits will be scheduled at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months postsurgery, and semiannual visits will continue until November 2027, including the record of tumour recurrence, metastasis, survival outcomes and overall long-term effects. The primary endpoint is total postoperative thoracic drainage. Secondary outcomes encompass intraoperative factors like R0 resection rate, operative time, postoperative drainage duration, hospital stay length, conversion rates, levels of stress markers, pain scores, quality of life assessments, perioperative complication rates, mortality rates and 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol is approved by the ethics committees of Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University (No. B2024-365), and will be conducted under the guidance of the Helsinki Declaration. All data and findings will be disseminated and published through peer review. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06654830.
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.