ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Subxiphoid two-port robotic vs video-assisted thymic surgery: a single-center propensity-matched analysis of perioperative outcomes.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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.
- Comparative outcomes of robotic- and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in thymectomy: a systematic review of implications for myasthenia gravis remission and long-term oncology.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Minimally invasive thymectomy: comparative analysis of short-term outcomes after video-assisted thoracoscopy and two robotic platforms.Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has emerged as a new option for treating mediastinal tumors, offering advantages of high precision and minimal invasiveness. This study uses a subxyphoid approach to compare the short-term outcomes of RATS versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for anterior mediastinal lesions; additionally, it assesses the short-term outcomes ofsubxyphoid bilateral port placement for these lesions and provides a preliminary evaluation of dual-port robotic assistance in terms of safety and feasibility. A retrospective analysis of patients treated at the Third Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from May 2020 to May 2025, who had preoperative CT evidence of anterior mediastinal lesions and underwent RATS or VATS. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used, and Love plots were generated to evaluate balance post-matching; perioperative outcomes between groups were compared with Holm correction for multiple testing. Finally, CUSUM/sequential analysis was used to assess the dynamic changes in operative time and intraoperative blood loss. A total of 88 patients were included (VATS 58, RATS 30). After PSM, the RATS group showed advantages in several perioperative outcomes: median operative time significantly shorter (80.0 [60.0, 100.0] minutes vs. 110.0 [90.0, 120.0] minutes, P < 0.001); intraoperative blood loss significantly reduced to 50.0 [20.0, 100.0] mL, compared with 100.0 [100.0, 200.0] mL in the VATS group, P = 0.001; postoperative white blood cell count lower (7.18 ± 1.92 × 10^9/L vs. 13.13 ± 2.69 × 10^9/L, P < 0.001); total drainage decreased to 150.0 [0.0, 200.0] mL, vs. 385.0 [20.5, 500.0] mL in the VATS group, P = 0.001; postoperative length of stay shorter (3.0 [1.0, 4.0] days vs. 5.0 [4.0, 6.0] days, P < 0.001). These results suggest that RATS may be associated with less trauma. For anterior mediastinal tumor resections, the perioperative outcomes of subxiphoid two-port robot-assisted surgery were comparable to VATS in terms of efficacy, with good safety and feasibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41217659What 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.