Non-intubated vs. intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for the treatment of thoracic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched cohorts
Clicks: 1
ID: 310295
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #460 of 490 articles by views in Frontiers in surgery
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 490 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
BackgroundVideo-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is commonly conducted under general anesthesia with tracheal intubation, which can lead to intubation-related complications. Consequently, non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (NIVATS) has gained increasing attention. However, debates persist regarding its safety and efficacy. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of NIVATS vs. intubated VATS (IVATS) in thoracic surgery.MethodsRelevant literature published up to October 2024 was collected from the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases based on predefined inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently screened these studies and extracted the pertinent data. After assessing the quality of the included studies, a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Fixed-effects or random-effects models were utilized to synthesize the combined data.ResultsCompared with IVATS, NIVATS demonstrated shorter operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = −23.33 min; 95% confidence interval (CI), −33.62 to −13.04; P < 0.01], reduced anesthesia time (WMD = −29.10 min; 95% CI, −48.16 to −10.04; P < 0.01), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD = −0.46 days; 95% CI, −0.82 to −0.10; P = 0.01), and decreased chest tube drainage duration (WMD = −0.40 days; 95% CI, −0.71 to −0.09; P = 0.01). However, regarding the incidence of postoperative complications, contrary to previous meta-analyses, the NIVATS group exhibited a higher rate of postoperative complications (odds ratio = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.17–2.98; P = 0.008). No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of intraoperative bleeding, the number of lymph nodes harvested, the number of N1 lymph nodes, the number of N2 lymph nodes, or postoperative length of hospital stay.ConclusionAlthough there were no significant differences between the two anesthesia methods concerning postoperative length of hospital stay, lymph node dissection, or intraoperative bleeding, NIVATS significantly reduced operative time, anesthesia time, length of hospital stay, and chest tube drainage duration. For highly selected patients, NIVATS may offer additional advantages. However, the increased postoperative complication rate associated with NIVATS compared with IVATS warrants further large, well-designed randomized trials.
| Reference Key |
imported_1768925847_696faa978b1e8
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Fu, Mao-Yong |
| Journal | Frontiers in surgery |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fsurg.2025.1661466
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.