ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2026
Short-term and long-term outcomes of non-tracheal intubation anesthesia in thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 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
The present study compared the efficacy and safety of non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (NIVATS) with intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (IVATS) for lobectomy in the treatment of lung cancer through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of six electronic databases were searched for studies comparing NIVATS and IVATS published up to October 2024. After rigorous screening and quality assessment, perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications were systematically analyzed from 18 studies, comprising three randomized controlled trials, six propensity score-matched studies and nine retrospective studies. A total of 2,313 patients with lung cancer underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy, of whom 1,082 underwent NIVATS and 1,231 underwent IVATS. The results revealed that NIVATS significantly reduced operative time [mean difference (MD)=11.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), -18.78 to -3.27], lymph nodes harvested (MD=-0.67; 95% CI, -1.24 to -0.11), anesthesia waking time (MD=-22.88; 95% CI, -33.13 to -12.64), feeding time (MD=-4.53; 95% CI, -5.74 to -3.32), chest tube indwelling time (MD=-0.68; 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.21) and hospital stay (MD=-1.16; 95% CI, -1.57 to -0.74) compared with the IVATS group. Total complications [odds ratio (OR)=0.53; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.90], particularly sore throat (OR=0.18; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.33) and pneumonia (OR=0.54; 95% CI=0.30 to 0.98) were significantly lower in the NIVATS group than in the IVATS group. Re-intubation occurred in 4.33% of NIVATS patients, while conversion to thoracotomy rates were similarly low in the NIVATS (0.69%) and IVATS (0.60%) groups. Importantly, NIVATS was associated with significantly improved overall survival [hazard ratio (HR)=0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.98] and recurrence-free survival (HR=0.62; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.85). No significant differences were observed for anesthesia time, blood loss, hoarseness, air leakage or arrhythmia. Under the enhanced recovery after surgery framework, NIVATS appears to be a safe and technically feasible alternative to IVATS, with the potential to improve patient outcomes based on the available evidence. Its clinical adoption is supported by the evidence in the present study, offering a basis for informed decision-making.
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.