ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Safe implementation of robot-assisted thoracic surgery in the UK: a single-centre experience and early outcomes.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) is a recognised alternative to video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) but remains under utilised in the UK. We describe the establishment of a RATS lobectomy service, outlining peri-operative outcomes and learning curve trends.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed peri-operative variables, post-operative complications, and learning curve progression in patients undergoing RATS lobectomy. Outcomes assessed included operation time, length of stay, complication rates, and composite technical failure (conversion, reoperation, or peri-operative death). Learning curve analysis was performed using grouped sequential cases and cumulative sum (CUSUM) methodology.
resultsBetween June 2022 and December 2024, 140 patients [60M:80F, median age 71 (range 42–86)] underwent RATS lobectomy by one surgeon. Median FEV1, FVC, and DLCO were 95.6%, 106%, and 81.3%, respectively. Eighty-nine cases (63.6%) were right-sided, with a median operative time of 125.5 minutes. Four patients (2.9%) required conversion (three due to adhesions, one due to bleeding). Median air leak duration was 2 days, and median hospital stay 4 days. Thirty-three patients (23.6%) developed complications: chest infection (9.3%), respiratory failure (1.4%), sepsis (1.4%) and cerebrovascular accident (0.7%). Three patients (2.1%) required re-exploration. There were two 30-day and one 90-day mortalities, but no intraoperative mortalities. Learning curve analysis demonstrated significant improvement in operative time (p < 0.001), with proficiency achieved after 59 cases. Composite technical proficiency was achieved after 79 cases.
conclusionsRATS lobectomy was safely established with low conversion and acceptable morbidity. Structured preparation, proctor involvement, and multidisciplinary engagement facilitated safe adoption, while efficiency improved without compromising safety.
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.