SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Perioperative outcomes and safety of Uniportal Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (U-RATS) for anatomic lung resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The unified front: a multidisciplinary approach in the Era of uniportal thoracic surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- The future of lung cancer surgery lies between innovations: synergy across the perioperative ERATS pathway.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Uniportal VATS for anatomical lung resection: 15 years of innovation.Frontiers in surgery · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (U-RATS) represents a recent evolution in minimally invasive lung resection, combining the single-incision philosophy with robotic technology. However, its perioperative safety and outcomes have not been clearly defined across published studies. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and a registered protocol. PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting perioperative outcomes of U-RATS for anatomic lung resection in adults. Primary outcomes included conversion rate, morbidity, and mortality. Secondary outcomes were operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and lymph node yield. Random-effects models were applied to pool estimates. Sixteen studies encompassing 579 patients were included. The pooled conversion rate was 1.34% (95% CI: 0.42–4.15%), with no observed heterogeneity. The pooled postoperative morbidity rate was 5.99% (95% CI: 4.46–7.91%), and the pooled mortality rate was 0.21% (95% CI: 0.07–0.64%). The pooled mean operative time was 171.3 min, the estimated blood loss was 51.9 mL, and the postoperative length of stay was 4.9 days. Across 11 studies, the pooled lymph node yield was 16.6 nodes (95% CI: 14.0–19.2; I² = 89.8%). Current evidence suggests that U-RATS is a safe and feasible approach for anatomic lung resection, with low conversion and complication rates and acceptable perioperative outcomes comparable to established minimally invasive techniques.
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.