ArticleAME case reports2025
Fully robotic circumferential resection for midtracheal mucoepidermoid carcinoma: a report of 2 cases.
Article in AME case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tracheobronchial mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is a salivary-gland type of lung cancer that originates from the submucosal glands of the tracheobronchial tree. MECs are rare, constituting 0.1% to 1.0% of lung carcinomas. Recent advancements in minimally invasive techniques allow for complete robotic resection of tracheal MECs. Case Description: Two cases are described in which patients underwent complete robotic thoracoscopic resection for the treatment of a tracheal MEC. Both patients, aged 14 and 28 years, with no significant medical history, presented with symptoms of hemoptysis and dyspnea on exertion. For both patients, spirometry revealed a flow volume loop indicative of intrathoracic central airway obstruction, computed tomography (CT) scans showed a midtracheal tumor and rigid bronchoscopy was performed for tumor debulking, confirming the pathological diagnosis of low-grade MEC. Multidisciplinary discussion led to the decision to proceed with primary surgical resection. In both cases, a circumferential tracheal resection with intrathoracic end-to-end anastomosis under veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) was performed via a fully robotic approach. There were no intraoperative complications. One patient required re-intervention via open approach due to positive resection margins on paraffin-embedded sections despite a negative frozen section peroperatively. Both patients had an uncomplicated recovery with discharge on postoperative days 7 and 4, respectively. The 30-day follow-up showed normal flexible bronchoscopy. The patients had no evidence of recurrence at 5-year (patient 1) and 1-year (patient 2) follow-up. Conclusions: A fully robotic thoracoscopic approach for midtracheal tumor resection under VV-ECMO is feasible, pending negative margins. Peroperative flexible bronchoscopy is essential to mark the lesion after endotracheal debulking. Multidisciplinary discussion is essential in the decision-making process for the treatment of MEC.
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.