ReviewCancers2025
Failure to Rescue and Lung Resections for Lung Cancer: Measuring Quality from the Operation Room to the Intensive Care Unit.
Review in Cancers, 2025. 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.
- Near Misses as Signals of System Vulnerability in Thoracic Surgery: A Narrative Review on Quality Improvement and Patient Safety.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Beyond Mortality: Textbook Outcome as a Novel Quality Metric in Cardiothoracic Surgical Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Failure to rescue (FTR), defined as death following a potentially treatable postoperative complication, has emerged as a critical quality metric in thoracic surgery. In patients undergoing lung cancer resection, who are often at high risk due to comorbidities and limited pulmonary reserve, FTR significantly influences morbidity, mortality, recovery, and overall quality of life. This review explores the multifactorial nature of FTR in lung cancer surgery, highlighting key patient-related and system-level risk factors, such as surgical complexity, delayed complication recognition, inadequate escalation of care, and limited critical care resources. Existing models for patient rescue emphasize early detection and timely intervention, but often overlook the institutional and cultural changes required for sustainable improvement. Building on current evidence and integrating Kotter's eight-step change model, we propose a novel multidimensional roadmap to reduce FTR through proactive monitoring, structured escalation protocols, multidisciplinary coordination, and continuous learning. Finally, reducing FTR in lung cancer resection requires more than clinical responsiveness. This necessitates a systemic transformation that aligns frontline practice with institutional readiness and a culture of safety.
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.