Thymectomy
Analysis and visualization developed by Oscar J.
Ponce, and project led by Andrea Paola
Solis-Pazmino
Publication
To know more about the methodology, results and conclusion of this study
follow the link below.
Title |
Impact of the Surgical Approach to Thymectomy Upon Complete Stable Remission Rates in Myasthenia Gravis: A Meta-analysis |
Journal |
Neurology |
Publication date |
4 May 2021 |
DOI |
10.1212/WNL.0000000000012153 |
Podcast
The results of this study were also shared in the Neurology®
Podcast
Open Data
Click any of the following links to view the documents
Summary of forest plots
Figure 2
Click to show
*Risk of achieving Complete Stable Remission in patients with myasthenia
gravis who underwent* ***Extended transsternal thymectomy*** *vs.*
***Transsternal thymectomy*** *at different follow-ups*
![](Forestplots/unnamed-chunk-1-1.svg)
> To generate this forest plot, we used information from Supplementary
> Figures 1 to 3.
Figure 3
Click to show
*Risk of achieving Complete Stable Remission in patients with myasthenia
gravis who underwent* ***Transsternal Thymectomy*** *vs.* ***Minimally
Invasive Thymectomy*** *at different follow-ups*
![](Forestplots/unnamed-chunk-2-1.svg)
> To generate this forest plot, we used information from Supplementary
> Figures 4 to 9.
Figure 4
Click to show
*Risk of achieving Complete Stable Remission in patients with myasthenia
gravis who underwent* ***different types of minimally invasive
thymectomy*** *at different follow-ups*
![](Forestplots/unnamed-chunk-3-1.svg)
Figure 5
Click to show
*Risk of achieving Complete Stable Remission in patients with myasthenia
gravis who underwent* ***VATS extended unilateral*** *vs. those who
underwent* ***VATS extended bilateral*** *thymectomy at different
follow-ups*
![](Forestplots/unnamed-chunk-4-1.svg)
Figure 6
Click to show
*Risk of postoperative complications in patients with Myasthenia gravis
undergoing thymectomy by minimally invasive vs. median sternotomy
approaches*
![](Forestplots/complications_overall-1.svg)
Supplementary Figures
Extended Transsternal vs. Basic Transsternal forest plots
Suppl. Figure 1: Extended Transsternal vs. Basic Transsternal, risk of
CSR at 3 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma40-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 2: Extended Transsternal vs. Basic Transsternal, risk of
CSR at 4 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma41-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 3: Extended Transsternal vs. Basic Transsternal, risk of
CSR at 4 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma42-1.svg)
Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended forest plots
Suppl. Figure 4: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
3 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma43-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 5: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
4 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma44-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 6: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
5 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma45-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 7: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
6 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma46-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 8: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
7 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma47-1.svg)
Suppl. Figure 9: Extended Transsternal vs. VATS extended, risk of CSR at
8 years of follow-up
![](Forestplots/forestplotma48-1.svg)