ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Early results of robotic versus uniportal video-assisted thoracic complex segmentectomy: a propensity score-matched study.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Robotic breast-conserving surgery: a retrospective study of feasibility and patient-reported aesthetic outcomes in 88 patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background/purposeRobotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has increasingly been adopted in thoracic surgery, yet direct comparisons with uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (uVATS) for complex segmentectomy remain limited. We compared early perioperative outcomes between RATS and uVATS for complex pulmonary segmentectomy.
methodsPatients undergoing complex segmentectomy between 2023 and 2025 were reviewed. Complex segmentectomy was defined as resection of any segment other than the bilateral superior segment of the lower lobes, lingular, or superior segment of the left upper lobe. After the RATS learning curve, a 1:1 propensity score matching was performed based on age, sex, ASA classification, BMI, and specific segmentectomy procedures, yielding 81 matched pairs in each group.
resultsRATS was associated with a significantly longer skin-to-skin operative time (133 vs. 92 min; P < 0.001) and higher self-paid costs (USD 5,899 vs. 2,557; P < 0.001). Chest drainage duration and length of hospital stay were comparable between the groups. Major morbidity occurred less frequently in the RATS group (0.0% vs. 7.4%; P = 0.031), although prolonged air leak itself did not significantly differ between groups (0.0% vs. 6.2%; P = 0.063). RATS was also associated with greater N2 nodal dissection and a higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (median 7 vs. 2; P < 0.001). No conversions or in-hospital mortality occurred.
conclusionRATS provides comparable short-term safety for complex segmentectomy. Although it is associated with longer operative time and increased financial burden, RATS may offer potential advantages in reducing major morbidity. These findings support the selective use of RATS for anatomically complex or high-risk cases. Further studies should assess long-term oncologic outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
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.