ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Transitioning from multiport to uniport robot-assisted thoracic surgery: a propensity score-weighted evaluation of safety and feasibility.
Article in Frontiers in 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present study assessed the safety and feasibility of uniport robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) during a structured transition from conventional multiport to uniport RATS. Methods: Patients undergoing RATS pulmonary resection for non-small cell lung cancer between June 2022 and December 2025 were included in this retrospective analysis. Perioperative outcomes were evaluated according to surgical approach (uniport vs. multiport). To address potential baseline differences between the groups, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity scores was employed. Results: The study cohort comprised 154 patients, with all operations performed by a single surgeon. Of these, 53 (34.4%) underwent uniport RATS and 101 (65.6%) underwent multiport RATS. After IPTW adjustment, baseline variables were adequately balanced across the groups. Complete resection was achieved in all cases, with one conversion in the multiport group. The surgical extent, histologic type, and lymph node assessment were comparable between groups. In our series, operative duration was shorter among patients undergoing uniport RATS both before (131.5 ± 23.4 vs. 145.8 ± 43.9 min, Conclusions: Within a structured transition pathway, uniport RATS achieved perioperative outcomes and early oncologic feasibility comparable to those of multiport RATS, supporting its safety and technical applicability.
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.