ArticleAnnals of thoracic surgery short reports2025
Combining Robotic Navigational Bronchoscopy and Lung Resection Into a Single Anesthetic Event: Cost-Effectiveness, Wait Times, and Outcomes.
Article in Annals of thoracic surgery short reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) during robotic bronchoscopy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Double-Lumen Intubation Facilitating a Single-Anesthesia Workflow in Robot-Assisted Navigational Bronchoscopy and Subsequent Lung Resection: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Can we rely on intraoperative bronchoscopic biopsies for surgical decision making? 78 single anesthetic robotic bronchoscopy to anatomic resections.JTCVS open · 2025Article
- Development and deployment of robots in a bronchoscopy suite.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2025Review
- Single-Anesthesia Event for Lung Nodule Marking and Minimally Invasive Sublobar Resection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Delay from diagnosis to resection in non-small cell lung cancer negatively affects survival. Single-anesthesia robotic navigational bronchoscopy with biopsy and lung resection (SABR) was developed to mitigate delay. We report outcomes, wait times, and cost effectiveness of this approach vs staggered robotic navigational bronchoscopy followed by resection. Methods: Patients undergoing SABR or staggered biopsy and resection between April 2020 and May 2023 were included. Demographic and procedural characteristics were collected for both groups. Time from clinic and biopsy to operation, length of stay, and inpatient complications were captured. Direct, indirect, and total costs, adjusted to 2023 dollars, were measured for each case. Results: The study included 40 patients in the SABR group and 30 patients in the staggered group. Baseline clinical characteristics including pathologic stage were similar between the groups. No difference was found in rates of complications. Time from clinic to resection was 26.5 days in the SABR group and 41.5 days in the staggered group ( Conclusions: Our experience suggests that the SABR technique offers a significant reduction in the time from diagnosis to treatment as well as reduces cost of care for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.
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.