ReviewCancers2026
Artificial Intelligence in Oncologic Thoracic Surgery: Clinical Decision Support and Emerging Applications.
Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Perioperative Risk Prediction in Anesthesiology: A Bibliometric and Knowledge-Mapping Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The evolution of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery: current platforms, emerging technologies, and future perspectives - a narrative review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery in the Immunotherapy Era: Navigating Altered Anatomy, Oncologic Precision, and the Future of Integrated Platforms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in thoracic surgery: a narrative review of clinical advances and applications in 2025.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- CT-Assessed Body Composition as Predictor of Post-Operative Complications in Lung Cancer Patients.Cancers · 2026Review
- Intelligent therapeutic robotic-assisted surgery as the next frontier of precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping thoracic surgery, advancing from decision support to the threshold of autonomous intervention. AI-driven technologies-including machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and computer vision-have demonstrated significant improvements in diagnostic accuracy, surgical planning, intraoperative navigation, and postoperative outcome prediction. In lung cancer and thoracic oncology, AI enhances imaging analysis, histopathological classification, and risk stratification, supporting multidisciplinary decision-making and personalized therapy. Robotic-assisted and AI-guided systems are optimizing surgical precision and workflow efficiency, while real-time decision-support tools and augmented reality are improving intraoperative safety. Despite these advances, widespread adoption is limited by challenges in algorithmic bias, data integration, regulatory approval, and ethical transparency. The literature emphasizes the need for multicenter validation, explainable AI, and robust governance frameworks to ensure safe and effective clinical integration. Future research should focus on digital twin technology, federated learning, and transparent AI outputs to further enhance reliability and accessibility. AI is poised to transform thoracic surgery, but responsible implementation and ongoing evaluation are essential for realizing its full potential. The aim of this review is to evaluate and synthesize the current landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) applications across the thoracic surgical pathway, from preoperative decision-support to intraoperative guidance and emerging autonomous interventions.
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.