ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2026
A retrospective cohort study of operated older patients undergoing lung resection after PFT-based versus CPET-based preoperative stratification.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A significant number of patients are unable to undergo surgery due to poor pulmonary function. In order to verify that this group of patients can be operated safely after a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) and thus increase the number of operated patients, we conducted this trial. Methods: This was a retrospective study. From 2022 to 2024, we conducted preoperative evaluations on a cohort of hospitalized patients. These patients initially underwent a pulmonary function test (PFT) to assess surgical risk. Those with suboptimal PFT results underwent further CPET. Ultimately, 130 patients proceeded to surgical treatment. The primary outcome focused on the incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints included operative duration, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospital stay, etc. Results: This study included a total of 130 older patients, with 71 patients in the PFT group and 59 in the CPET group. Regarding postoperative complications, there was no statistically significant difference between the PFT group (n=17, 23.94%) and the CPET group (n=15, 25.42%) (P=0.76). Length of hospitalization (P=0.04) and chest tube duration (P=0.045) showed significant differences. No significant differences were observed in other perioperative outcomes either. Conclusions: For patients with suboptimal PFT results, further CPET is recommended. Compared to patients who underwent PFT alone, no significant differences were observed in postoperative complications. This suggests that CPET serves as a feasible supplementary tool that does not result in a statistically significant increase in postoperative complications in selected patients who proceed to surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.