Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22538684›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2012

Effectiveness of electrothermal bipolar vessel-sealing devices versus other electrothermal and ultrasonic devices for abdominal surgical hemostasis: a systematic review.

Petra F Janssen, Hans A M Brölmann, Judith A F Huirne

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02140476 (Comparative Analysis Between A Bipolar Vessel Sealing and Cutting Device and the Tie and Suture Technique in Thyroidectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02140476 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Analysis Between A Bipolar Vessel Sealing and Cutting Device and the Tie and Suture Technique in Thyroidectomy: A Two Institution Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador ZubiranRan2014 to 2015Enrolled160ConditionsThyroid Goiter, Papillary Thyroid CancerArmsBipolar vessel sealing and cutting device, Conventional thyroidectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. New Surgical Technologies Could Facilitate Surgical Hemostasis in Hemophilic Patients.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Changes over time in milk test results following pancreatectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Petra F JanssenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1181 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pfjanssen@hetnet.nl
Hans A M Brölmann
Judith A F Huirne

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdequate hemostatic techniques are essential for optimal intra- and postoperative results. A number of different hemostatic techniques and devices have been developed over the past few years, but which device should be preferred during laparoscopic and open abdominal procedures?

methodsWe conducted a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness and costs of vessel-sealing devices with those of other electrothermal or ultrasonic devices in abdominal surgical procedures.

resultsSeven RCTs that included 554 patients met the inclusion criteria. Various procedures that used a vessel-sealing device (LigaSure™) (n = 264) were compared to ultrasonic devices (n = 139) and mono- (n = 20) or bipolar devices (n = 130). LigaSure was favored in two studies with respect to less blood loss, shorter operating time, and lower costs. However, no differences were observed in the other studies. Considering the relatively low number of complications, all hemostatic devices used may be considered relatively safe. None of the studies reported on quality of life or cost effectiveness.

conclusionsVessel-sealing devices may be considered safe and their use may reduce costs due to reduced blood loss and shorter operating time in some abdominal surgical procedures compared to mono- or bipolar electrothermal devices. Wider-ranging RCTs of sufficient quality that assess (cost) effectiveness are required to make firm conclusions.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisElectrocoagulationEquipment SafetyHemostasis, SurgicalHumansLength of StayRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSuture TechniquesUltrasonics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.