ArticleBMC research notes2014
Using NU-KNIT® for hemostasis around recurrent laryngeal nerve during transthoracic esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer.
Article in BMC research notes, 2014. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: incidence, management, and impact on short- and long-term outcomes.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe thought that using electrocautery for hemostasis caused recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. We reflected the prolonged use of electrocautery and employed NU-KNIT® to achieve hemostasis nearby the recurrent laryngeal nerve. We assessed that using NU-KNIT® hemostasis prevented or not postoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, retrospectively. The present study was evaluated to compare using electrocautery hemostasis with using NU-KNIT® hemostasis during lymphadenectomy along recurrent laryngeal nerve. The variables compared were morbidity rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, operation time, and blood loss.
resultsWe use NU-KNIT® to achieve hemostasis without strong compression. This group is named group N. On the other hand, we use electrocautery to achieve hemostasis. This group is named group E. Complication rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was higher in group E (55.6%) than group N (5.3%) (p = 0.007).
conclusionsEven hemostasis using NU-KNIT® was slightly more time-consuming than using electrocautery, we concluded that it would be useful to prevent recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.
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.