Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 725

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Trials on Safety and Efficacy of Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Yan, Tristan D., Black, Deborah, Bannon, Paul G., McCaughan, Brian C.·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: The current randomized trials comparing video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy with open lobectomy for patients with early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been of small size. We performed the present meta-analysis of the randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies in an attempt to assess the safety and efficacy of VATS lobectomy. Methods: Electronic searches identified 21 eligible comparative studies (two randomized and 19 nonrandomized) for inclusion. Two reviewers independently appraised each study. Meta-analysis was performed by combining the results of reported incidence of morbidity and mortality, recurrence, and 5-year mortality rates. The relative risk (RR) was used as a summary statistic. Results: There were no significant statistical differences between VATS and open lobectomy in terms of postoperative prolonged air leak (P = .71), arrhythmia (P = .86), pneumonia (P = .09), and mortality (P = .49). VATS did not demonstrate any significant difference in locoregional recurrence (P = .24), as compared with the open lobectomy arm, but the data suggested a reduced systemic recurrence rate (P = .03) and an improved 5-year mortality rate of VATS (P = .04). There was no evidence to suggest heterogeneity of trial results. Fourteen studies reported VATS to open lobectomy conversion rate ranging from 0% to 15.7% (median = 8.1%). Conclusion: Both randomized and nonrandomized trials suggest that VATS lobectomy is an appropriate procedure for selected patients with early-stage NSCLC when compared with open surgery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2008.18.2733

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 725

Metadata

Authors
Yan, T. D., Black, D., Bannon, P. G., & McCaughan, B. C.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-05-20
Volume
27
Issue
15
Pages
2553-2562
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1999605433
Cited by
725
References
4
FWCI
6.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Trials on Safety and Efficacy of Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.18.2733
The paper
Yan, T. D., Black, D., Bannon, P. G., & McCaughan, B. C. (2009). Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Trials on Safety and Efficacy of Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy for Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.18.2733

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.