Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41076542›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS2025

Quality of Lymph Node Dissection in Lung Cancer Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Using Novel Pathological Criteria.

Adrien Deceuninck, Pierre-Alain Thiebaut, Michael Bubenheim, Sonia Aguir, Benjamin Bottet, Antoine Dujon, Mathias Couralet, Jean Melki, Matthieu Sarsam, Jean-Christophe Sabourin and 3 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Adrien DeceuninckDepartment of Pathology, UNIROUEN, INSERM U1245, CHU Rouen, Normandy University, Rouen, France.
Pierre-Alain ThiebautDepartment of Pathology, UNIROUEN, INSERM U1245, CHU Rouen, Normandy University, Rouen, France.
Michael BubenheimRouen University Hospital, DRCI, Rouen, France.
Sonia AguirDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Benjamin BottetDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Antoine DujonDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Mathias CouraletDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Jean MelkiDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Matthieu SarsamDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Jean-Christophe SabourinDepartment of Pathology, UNIROUEN, INSERM U1245, CHU Rouen, Normandy University, Rouen, France.
Florian GuisierDepartment of Pneumology, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.
Jean-Marc BasteDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Center University de Rouen, Rouen, France.
Nicolas PitonDepartment of Pathology, UNIROUEN, INSERM U1245, CHU Rouen, Normandy University, Rouen, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8779-586X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLymph node dissection is essential for lung cancer staging and treatment planning. This study compares the extent and quality of lymph node dissection between robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS).

methodsIn this prospective cohort study, 40 patients undergoing oncologic lobectomy via RATS (n = 20) or VATS (n = 20) were included. We assessed the number of explored lymph node stations, dissected nodes, and microscopic integrity criteria.

resultsRATS resulted in a higher median number of explored stations (5 vs. 4; p = 0.0375) and resected nodes (8 vs. 6; p = 0.0432). However, no significant differences were found in the microscopic quality criteria.

conclusionsRATS enables broader lymph node dissection but does not improve microscopic quality compared with VATS. These findings highlight the need for further studies to assess clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsLymph Node ExcisionRobotic Surgical ProceduresThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedAgedFemaleHumansLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPneumonectomyProspective Studieslung cancerlymph node dissectionrobot‐assisted thoracic surgery (RATS)thoracic surgeryvideo‐assisted surgeryvideo‐assisted thoracic surgery (VATS)

Identifiers

PMID41076542
PMCPMC13020668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.