Evidence Hub

Postoperative Pain Reduction and Clinical Value of Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery: A Secondary Analysis of the J-RATSIG 01 Study

Takuya Watanabe, Masayuki Tanahashi, Masato Chiba, Kumiko Hashimoto, N. Sakakura, M. Okazaki, Shoichi Mori, Masaki Hashimoto et al.

Clinical Lung Cancer, 2025

205 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The J-RATSIG 01 multi-institutional prospective study found robot-assisted thoracic surgery to be inferior to video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in terms of postoperative pain. Because reducing the number of ports was linked to pain reduction, we conducted a secondary analysis comparing uniportal VATS (U-VATS) and multiportal VATS (M-VATS).

METHODS

This analysis included 205 patients who underwent anatomical lung resection using VATS at 12 institutions. Postoperative pain was assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS) and painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) on postoperative days 10, 30, and 90.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients underwent U-VATS, and 110 underwent M-VATS. The U-VATS group had significantly shorter operation times, chest tube duration, and hospital stay than the M-VATS group (146 vs. 180 min, 2.1 vs. 2.6 days, 4.8 vs. 6.4 days, respectively). Analgesic use was also significantly lower in the U-VATS group at all postoperative phases (64% vs. 90%, 14% vs. 52%, and 1% vs. 15%, all P 3 on postoperative days 10 and 30 (odds ratio: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.08-0.84; odds ratio: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

U-VATS significantly reduced postoperative pain and was associated with shorter operation times, chest tube duration, and hospitalization than M-VATS.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 205 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free