ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2026
Robotic-assisted versus open resection of pulmonary sequestration: a retrospective cohort study. RATS surgery for pulmonary sequestration.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic surgery for pulmonary sequestration: interpreting early advantages.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
- Complete Thoracoscopic Sublobar Resection for Intralobar Pulmonary Sequestration Using Indocyanine Green Fluorescence: A Case Report with Literature Review.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary sequestration (PS) is a rare congenital lung malformation often requiring surgical resection due to recurrent infections or hemoptysis. Traditionally treated via open thoracotomy, recent advancements have made minimal-invasive approaches like robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) increasingly viable. This study compares outcomes between RATS and open resection for PS in a high-volume center.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, 23 adult patients who underwent surgical resection of PS between 2010 and 2023 were analyzed. Fifteen patients were treated via open thoracotomy (THKT), while eight underwent RATS using the DaVinci-X system. We compared preoperative findings, intraoperative variables, and postoperative outcomes.
resultsThe patients in the RATS group were younger (median age: 36 vs 47 years) and had a shorter median hospital stay (5 vs 10 days, p < 0.001) compared to the THKT group. The RATS group also experienced earlier chest drainage removal (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.016). However, the median duration of surgery was longer for RATS (118 vs. 75 min, p = 0.018). A trend towards less postoperative complications was observed in the RATS group (33% vs. 0%).
conclusionsRATS provides a safe and effective alternative to open surgery for PS resection, with benefits including reduced hospital stay and earlier chest tube removal. Despite longer operative times, the minimally invasive approach may offer enhanced recovery and fewer complications. Continued accumulation of experience with RATS is likely to improve operative efficiency, making it a valuable option in the surgical management of pulmonary malformations.
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.