ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Perioperative outcomes of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy in scope operation performed by a clinical engineer.
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. 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Feasibility and surgical outcomes of thoracoscopic surgery for spontaneous pneumothorax with scope manipulation performed by clinical engineers: a retrospective comparative study.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In Japan, clinical engineers (CEs) have been permitted to operate endoscopic video cameras in endoscopic surgery since October 2021. The current study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UVATS) lobectomy in scope operation performed by a CE. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent lobectomy between January 2020 and December 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. The perioperative outcomes of UVATS lobectomy in scope operation conducted by surgeons [the doctor (DR) group] were compared with those of UVATS lobectomy in scope operation performed by CEs (the CE group). The perioperative outcomes between the DR and CE groups were compared using propensity-score matching. Results: In total, 71 and 77 patients in the CE and DR groups, respectively, underwent UVATS lobectomy. After propensity-score matching, the data of 46 patients from each of the two groups were retrieved. The two groups did not significantly differ in terms of surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss volume, rate of conversion to multiportal VATS lobectomy or thoracotomy, postoperative morbidity, drain placement duration, and length of postoperative hospital stay. None of the patients in the two groups died. Conclusions: The perioperative outcomes of UVATS lobectomy in scope operation conducted by CEs were comparable to those of UVATS lobectomy in scope operation performed by surgeons.
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.