ArticleEplasty2010
Endoscope-assisted submandibular sialadenectomy: a review of outcomes, complications, and ethical concerns.
Article in Eplasty, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary Review of Submandibular Gland Sialolithiasis and Surgical Management Options.Cureus · 2022Review
- Endoscope-assisted resection of nonneoplastic space-occupying lesion in oral and maxillofacial areas.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Complications of traditional and modern therapeutic salivary approaches.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2017Review
- Radiofrequency: the next step for gingival depigmentation.Journal of cutaneous and aesthetic surgery · 2013Article
- Response to "Interventional sialendoscopy for treatment of juvenile recurrent parotitis".Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo review outcomes and complications of endoscope-assisted submandibular sialadenectomy (EASS) and to analyze this innovative technique with regard to ethical issues.
methodsWe used a systematic review study design to identify clinical studies on EASS, published in English, French, German, and Thai. The last electronic search was conducted in September 2009. We checked the bibliographies of the identified articles, relevant local journals, and congress abstracts. Publications were further assessed and assigned their respective levels of evidence. We also investigated reporting on human subject protection, conflicts of interest, funding support, and commercial relationships.
resultsFive case series reporting a total of 28 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was no need of recourse to open surgery. All of the authors claimed satisfactory cosmetic results. Complications were uncommon. However, no controlled trial was available, and outcome measures varied between studies. Human subject protection and funding sources were mentioned in only 2 articles. Commercial relationships and conflicts of interest could not be identified.
conclusionsAll of the reports favor outcomes of EASS. However, their level of evidence is low, and the superiority of this procedure over the conventional surgery remains unknown. The success of this procedure should not be overemphasized in information for consent and mislead surgeons to begin it without adequate training and elaborate environment. The lack of ethical documentation creates a high degree of suspicion of the studies.
Identifiers
20505849PMC2875098What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.