SynthesisLancet (London, England)2026
Survival outcome of VATS compared with open lobectomy for lung cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials.
Synthesis in Lancet (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07541521 (Robotic-Assisted Sleeve Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
Robotic-Assisted Sleeve Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoimmunotherapy
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical performance of da Vinci 5 versus Xi for robotic anatomic lung resection: a propensity-weighted analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- The incision matters: survival evidence finally catches up with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- What comes next after establishing evidence for video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer?Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Mortality and predictive models for 90-/180- day postoperative death for NSCLC patients aged ≥70 years.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Impact of modern minimally invasive approaches on pulmonary resection outcomes: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Initial experience with the EndoFusion 3D system for noninvasive intraoperative localization of pulmonary nodules.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Major Postoperative Complications and Survival After Lung Cancer Resection in Patients Aged ≥80 Years: Risk Factor Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Prediction and intraoperative validation of pulmonary interlobar fissure development based on high-resolution thin-slice computed tomography and multiplanar reconstruction three-dimensional reconstruction technology: a prospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Uncovering the realities of suicidal ideation in older patients following lung cancer diagnosis: an interpretive phenomenological qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Intrapleural hemocoagulase Bothrops atrox and early outcomes after VATS for stage IA non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The unified front: a multidisciplinary approach in the Era of uniportal thoracic surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is currently the most common approach for pulmonary lobectomy in early-stage lung cancer. Reported advantages include less pain, fewer complications, faster recovery, and improved postoperative quality of life. The widespread adoption of VATS lobectomy is principally based on non-oncological benefits. Its oncological equivalence to open surgery remains assumed as no single trial has been powered for survival. To address this important question, we sought to conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis of eligible randomised trials.
methodsWe systematically reviewed PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, limiting the searches to papers published between Jan 1, 2000, and June 13, 2025. We included completed randomised controlled trials comparing VATS versus open lobectomy performed after the year 2000 conducted for clinical early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer in adults aged 18 years or older that collected information on mortality and disease recurrence. Individual patient data were extracted from the included studies, and authors were contacted where data were unavailable. The primary outcome was overall survival, and the secondary outcome was disease-free survival. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. The primary analytical strategy was a one-stage random effects Cox proportional hazards model. A two-stage approach was performed to assess consistency.
findingsWe screened 554 articles and three studies were eligible for inclusion. Data were provided for 1185 patients (586 randomised to VATS and 599 randomised to open lobectomy). Overall survival favoured VATS lobectomy, reflecting a 21% mortality risk reduction (pooled hazard ratio [HR] 0·79 [95% CI 0·65-0·96]). Disease-free survival was similar in both groups (pooled HR 0·91 [0·75-1·12]). There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity across trials for either outcome.
interpretationThis meta-analysis provides evidence that surgical access by VATS lobectomy improved overall survival compared with open surgery without any compromise to disease-free survival. These results underscore the importance of prioritising VATS when technically feasible as the access of choice for surgical resection of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer.
fundingNational Institute for Health and Care Research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41864749What 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.