ArticleJTCVS techniques2026
Lung-preserving surgery is comparable to lobectomy for intralobar pulmonary sequestration: A retrospective case series.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes and recovery of lung-preserving surgery in patients with intralobar pulmonary sequestration, providing insights into surgical management strategies. Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, patients diagnosed with intralobar pulmonary sequestration who underwent surgery between September 2013 and March 2025 were analyzed. According to the surgical technique, patients were categorized into lobectomy or lung-preserving surgery groups (segmentectomy, wedge resection, or vascular disconnection). Perioperative outcomes and short-term follow-up results were compared between the groups. Results: A total of 79 patients were included, comprising 53 lobectomies and 26 lung-preserving procedures (arterial disconnection, segmentectomy, or wedge resection). Compared with lobectomy, lung-preserving surgery showed shorter median operative time (67.5 vs 130.0 minutes, Conclusions: Lung-preserving surgery appears to be a safe and effective alternative to lobectomy for selected patients with intralobar pulmonary sequestration, offering comparable short-term outcomes while reducing operative trauma.
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.