ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted excision of intracardiac masses: a single-center retrospective study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive techniques for intracardiac mass excision have become more popular as alternatives to traditional sternotomy, offering potential advantages in terms of recovery and complication risk. However, evidence regarding their effectiveness and safety remains limited, especially for larger or more complex masses.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 26 patients who underwent minimally invasive intracardiac mass excision at Gulhane Training and Research Hospital between April 2015 and December 2023. Right minithoracotomy was performed in nine patients, and robot-assisted surgery was performed in 17 patients. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were reviewed, with descriptive statistics used to summarize outcomes.
resultsThe cohort included a variety of benign and malignant cardiac masses. A patient required concurrent mitral valve replacement, and another needed additional mitral valve replacement and tricuspid valve repair. The largest excised mass measured 85 mm by 35 mm. One patient in the right minithoracotomy subgroup experienced intraoperative hemorrhage from the posterior wall of the left atrium and was converted to sternotomy for bleeding control. There is one in-hospital mortality from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia; no late mortalities or reoperations occurred during a maximum follow-up of 104 months. The cardiopulmonary bypass times were 115.4 ± 70.8, 114.6 ± 44.9 min, and the cross-clamp times were 75.4 ± 38.8, 67.8 ± 43.6 min for the right minithoracotomy and robot-assisted subgroups, respectively.
conclusionsMinimally invasive and robotic-assisted techniques for intracardiac mass excision may be safe and effective in select patients, offering outcomes similar to those of traditional surgery, with potential benefits in recovery. Careful preoperative assessment remains essential, especially for large or complex masses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42458588What 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.