ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Safe transition to robotics: How an established program on vats shapes postoperative outcomes in lung resection.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become a cornerstone in thoracic surgical practice, providing significant benefits over traditional thoracotomy, including reduced postoperative pain and faster recovery. Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) represents the latest evolution of MIS, offering enhanced dexterity and precision compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). This retrospective study analyzed perioperative outcomes following the introduction of a RATS program for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at a single institution already experienced in VATS. Data from 298 patients who underwent minimally invasive anatomical lung resections between January 2020 and December 2022 were reviewed. Among them, 205 (68.8%) underwent VATS and 93 (31.2%) underwent RATS. The overall complication rate was 29.9%, with a 1.0% 30-day and 0.3% 90-day mortality. RATS procedures were initially associated with longer operative times but demonstrated significantly fewer severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III–IV, p = 0.011). After the learning curve phase (first 50 cases), operative times became comparable between RATS and VATS, while the robotic approach was associated with shorter hospital stays and no major complications. Multivariable analysis confirmed RATS as independently associated with lower odds of severe complications (OR 0.17; p = 0.026). Length of stay showed a non-significant trend favoring RATS. These results indicate that RATS can be safely and effectively integrated into an established VATS program. Progressive experience reduces operative time and complication rates, confirming RATS as a feasible and safe addition to minimally invasive thoracic surgery in a real-world clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41851556What 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.