ArticleJTCVS open2026
Impact of intraoperative specimen computed tomography imaging on grossing accuracy and margin assessment in pulmonary wedge resection.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate whether specimen computed tomography imaging (2- or 3-dimensional) influences the accuracy and decision-making in pathological grossing for pulmonary wedge resection. Methods: In this randomized prospective study, pulmonary wedge resection specimens were divided into 3 groups: control (no imaging), 2-dimensional computed tomography, and 3-dimensional computed tomography. Pathology assistants performed grossing with or without intraoperative computed tomography guidance per group assignment. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire assessed perceived usefulness in tumor localization, cut-line location, cut-line angle, and overall grossing impact. Margins measured on 2- and 3-dimensional computed tomography with actual cutting lines were compared with pathological margins. Subgroup analyses were performed for lung cancer and metastatic tumors. Results: Across all specimens (n = 45), no parameter reached statistical significance. However, 3-dimensional computed tomography tended to score higher for cut-line angle impact (median 4 [3-4]) and overall grossing impact (median 4 [3-5]) than 2-dimensional computed tomography. In lung cancer cases (n = 16), 3-dimensional computed tomography significantly impacted cut-line angle compared with 2-dimensional computed tomography (median 2.5 [2-3] vs 4 [3-4.25], Conclusions: Intraoperative computed tomography imaging demonstrated high accuracy in margin estimation and provided reliable guidance for pathological grossing. Selective computed tomography evaluation may be advantageous for lesions difficult to palpate, such as deeply located small tumors.
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.