SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Evaluating Surgical Approaches in Early NSCLC: A Meta-Analysis of Robot-Assisted and Video-Assisted Techniques.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The extent of lymph node dissection in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: current controversies, evidence gaps, and future directions in the immunotherapy era-a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- RoboticJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Ropivacaine in Combined Thoracic Paravertebral Block and Serratus Anterior Plane Block for Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Application of Robotic Surgery for the Most Complex Hepatobiliary Cancer Resection: The Feasibility and Future Role of Robotic Technology in Treatment of Bismuth Type IV Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Application of Robotic Approach in Right Hepatectomy for Resection of Radioembolized Tumor with Inferior Vena Cava Contact: Evolution of Minimally Invasive Technique for Difficult Liver Resections.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer, especially non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), is a leading cause of cancer death. Surgical resection is the primary treatment for early-stage NSCLC. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) are minimally invasive options, with RATS offering better precision at higher costs. This meta-analysis compared the perioperative outcomes of both techniques in NSCLC.
methodsA systematic search in PubMed, Web of Science, NLM, CNKI, and Wanfang was conducted for RCTs published between 31 July 2021 and 31 December 2024. Primary outcomes included operation time, blood loss, lymph node dissection, conversion to thoracotomy, chest drainage time, and hospital stay. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3, with heterogeneity assessed using the I
resultsThree RCTs were analyzed. Blood loss showed no significant difference between VATs and RATs (mean difference [MD], -33.00; 95% CI, -85.51 to 22.89; p = 0.07). Conversion to thoracotomy was comparable (MD, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.28; p = 0.24). Hospital stay did not differ significantly (MD, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.58 to 0.84; p = 0.74). Operation time remained similar (MD, -4.63; 95% CI, -10.93 to 1.67; p = 0.15). The VATS procedure enabled significantly greater lymph node dissection (MD, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.16 to 3.49; p = 0.03). Chest drainage duration showed no difference (MD, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.27 to 0.27; p = 1.00).
conclusionIn NSCLC, RATS and VATS yield comparable outcomes, with RATS potentially reducing blood loss and VATS allowing more lymph node dissection. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to clarify the optimal approach for NSCLC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41369812What 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.