ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Limited adoption of thymectomy for nonthymomatous myasthenia gravis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Thymectomy had been an accepted treatment for myasthenia gravis (MG) for decades. Despite this, practice patterns of thymectomy for MG vary even though there is growing evidence of its safety and efficacy. This retrospective database study aimed to assess the safety of thymectomy for patients with nonthymomatous MG and to determine how surgical management of nonthymomatous MG changed following the 2016 publication of results from a phase 3, multicenter, randomized trial (MGTX trial) demonstrating thymectomy plus prednisone was superior to medical management alone. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all thymectomy cases 2005-2023 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. We compiled postoperative complications and mortality into broad and narrow composite outcomes to display adverse events associated with thymectomy in MG patients. We then used National Institutes of Health (NIH) Joinpoint models to indicate changes in annual rates of thymectomy (in general) and minimally invasive thymectomy (specifically) for MG between 2005-2023 pre- and post- publication of the MGTX trial. Results: The queried NSQIP database had a total of 352 nonthymomatous thymectomies performed on MG patients between 2005-2023. The odds of experiencing a broad composite outcome following thymectomy was 7.1% (N=25) and the odds of experiencing a narrow outcome was 3.1% (N=11). The data also showed that there were no 30-day mortalities. Annual percentage change (APC) of thymectomy and minimally invasive thymectomy for MG gradually increased until 2019 and 2020 (2.52% and 4.01% APC, respectively), before decreasing through 2023 (-10.79% APC, P=0.02, and -17.51% APC, P=0.27, respectively). Conclusions: Following the 2016 MGTX trial, thymectomy continues to be a safe procedure among MG patients. Despite this, the current study reveals limited adoption of thymectomy into practice as reflected by the predicted annual rate of thymectomy in MG patients.
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.