SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Perioperative outcomes comparisons of thymoma treatment between robot-assisted thymectomy (RATS) and video-assisted thymectomy (VATS): a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Educational quality of YouTube videos on robot-assisted thymectomy: a LAP-VEGaS-based evaluation.BMC medical education · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo conduct a meta-analysis to determine the relative merits between robot-assisted thymectomy (RATS) and video-assisted thymectomy (VATS) for thymoma treatment.
methodsA total of 1860 patients who underwent thymectomy were included in this study. Of these, 897 patients underwent RATS and 963 underwent VATS. Perioperativeive outcomes were compared. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using either the fixed effects model or the random effects model.
results15 studies were included with a total of 1860 patients, including 897 patients in the RATS group and 963 patients in the VATS group. Compared to VATS, reports of RATS indicated favorable outcomes considering the hospital stay (SMD = -1.52, 95% CI -2.39 to -0.65), estimated blood loss (SMD = -27.42, 95% CI -50.51 to -4.34), duration of chest tube insertion (SMD = -1.07, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.32), volume of drainage (SMD = -61.55, 95% CI -166.97 to 43.87), conversion to open (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.56). Operative time and ICU stay with RATS were not significantly different from VATS (SMD = 1.62; 95% CI -11.79 to 15.03; P = 0.81), (SMD = -0.13; 95% CI -0.32 to 0.06; P = 0.17). The mortality and complications rates in both groups were comparable (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.20–2.10; P = 0.46), (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.54–1.48; P = 0.66). Meanwhile, the sub-group meta-analysis for hospital stay indicated that RATS yielded a shorter time compared with VATS in non-Asian patients with no significant difference(SMD = 1.62, 95% CI -11.79 to 15.03, P = 0.81). The meta-analysis for complications indicated no difference in sub-group. (OR = 0.89, 95% CI -0.54 to 1.48, P = 0.66).
conclusionOur study suggests that the RATS approach is a feasible alternative approach and even a better option for thymoma surgery treatment. Further studies are required to confirm these results.
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.