ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2012
Magnetically anchored cautery dissector improves triangulation, depth perception, and workload during single-site laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Miniature magnetically anchored and controlled camera system for trocar-less laparoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study evaluated operative outcomes and workload during single-site laparoscopy (SSL) using a magnetically anchored cautery dissector (MAGS) compared with a conventional laparoscopic hook cautery (LAP).
methodsEach cautery was used to perform six SSL porcine cholecystectomies. For MAGS, the cautery device was inserted through the umbilical incision, magnetically coupled, and deployed; two graspers and a laparoscope were used. For LAP, two percutaneous retraction sutures, one grasper, a hook cautery dissector, and a laparoscope were used. Operative outcomes, surgeon ratings (scale, 1-5; 1 = superior), and workload (scale, 1-10; 1 = superior) were evaluated.
resultsNo significant differences were detected for operative outcomes and surgeon ratings, however, trends were detected favoring MAGS. Surgeon workload ratings were significantly better for MAGS (2.6 ± 0.2) vs. LAP (5.6 ± 1.1; p < 0.05). For MAGS, depth perception and triangulation were excellent and the safe handling protocol was followed with no complications. For LAP, the parallelism of instruments and lack of triangulation hindered depth perception, caused instrument conflicts, and resulted in two minor complications (one superficial liver laceration and one inadvertent burn to the diaphragm).
conclusionThese data suggest that using the MAGS device for SSL cholecystectomy results in equivalent (or better) operative outcomes and less workload compared with LAP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.