Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42237053›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026

Robotic vs thoracoscopic vs open lobectomy and segmentectomy for lung cancer: a multicenter cohort study in the ATS of Milan.

Cristina Mazzali, Carlotta Buzzoni, Fabrizio Grignani, Matteo Alessio Incarbone, Giuseppe Marulli, Mario Nosotti, Gian Luca Pariscenti, Ugo Pastorino, Lorenzo Spaggiari, Giulia Veronesi and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Cristina MazzaliEpidemiology Unit, Health Protection Agency (ATS) of Milan, Via Conca del Naviglio, 45, 20123, Milan, Italy.
Carlotta BuzzoniEpidemiology Unit, Health Protection Agency (ATS) of Milan, Via Conca del Naviglio, 45, 20123, Milan, Italy.
Fabrizio GrignaniSSD Chirurgia Generale Indirizzo Toracico, ASST Ovest Milanese, Legnano, Italy.
Matteo Alessio IncarboneDepartment of Surgery, IRCCS Multimedica, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe MarulliDivision of Thoracic Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Mario NosottiThoracic Surgery and Lung Transplant Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Gian Luca PariscentiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Ugo PastorinoThoracic Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Lorenzo SpaggiariDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Giulia VeronesiThoracic Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Antonio Giampiero RussoEpidemiology Unit, Health Protection Agency (ATS) of Milan, Via Conca del Naviglio, 45, 20123, Milan, Italy. agrusso@ats-milano.it.
THOR-ATS (Thoracic Health Outcomes Research) Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of open thoracotomy (OT), video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) for anatomical lung resection in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. We conducted a multicenter cohort study across eight hospitals in the Milan health authority, including patients undergoing lobectomy or segmentectomy in 2016-2021 (retrospective) and 2023-2025 (prospective). Inverse probability weighting was used to estimate average treatment effects. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, and conversion to thoracotomy; secondary outcomes were operative time, postoperative length of stay (PO-LOS), 180-day mortality, and overall survival. The analytic cohort included 1,605 patients (647 OT, 653 VATS, 305 RATS). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of conversion were higher with VATS than with RATS (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.43-4.24). Adjusted overall survival was unfavorable for OT vs. RATS (hazard rate 1.51 95% CI 1.11-2.05). Adjusted PO-LOS was longer with OT and VATS versus RATS (OR 3.38, 95% CI 2.62-4.37; and 1.90, 1.47-2.44). OT had shorter operative time and higher frequency of complications than minimally invasive approaches. VATS had longer operative time than RATS. Thirty-day readmission and 180-day mortality were similar across approaches. RATS was associated with shorter hospitalization and fewer conversion than VATS and with better adjusted survival than OT; early mortality and readmission were similar across approaches.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsPneumonectomyRobotic Surgical ProceduresThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedThoracotomyAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansItalyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsLung cancerMulticentric cohort studyOpen thoracotomy (OT)Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS)Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)

Identifiers

PMID42237053
PMCPMC13233879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.