ArticleBioMed research international2015
Comparison and efficacy of LigaSure and rubber band ligature in closing the inflamed cecal stump in a rat model of acute appendicitis.
Article in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the Perioperative Outcomes of a Vessel Sealing Instrument-Assisted Technique with a Conventional Technique in Abdominal Myomectomy.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Safety of either LigaSure or rubber band in closing inflamed appendiceal stump in acute appendicitis has been less investigated. In this study, cecal ligation followed by resecting inflamed cecum was performed to mimic appendectomy in a rat model of acute appendicitis. Rats were sacrificed immediately (Group A) and 7 days (Group B) after cecal resection, respectively. The cecal stumps were closed by silk ligature (S), 5 mm LigaSure (L), or rubber band (R). Seven days after cecal resection, the LigaSure (BL) and silk subgroups (BS) had significantly less intra-abdominal adhesion and better laparotomy wound healing than rubber band subgroup (BR). The initial bursting pressure at cecal stump was comparable among the three methods; along with tissue healing process, both BL and BS provided a higher bursting pressure than BR 7 days after appendectomy. BL subgroup had more abundant hydroxyproline deposition than BS and BR subgroup. Furthermore, serum TNF-α in BR group kept persistently increasing along with time after cecal resection. Thus, the finding that LigaSure but not rubber band is safe in sealing off the inflamed cecal stump in rat model of acute appendicitis suggests the possibility of applying LigaSure for appendectomy via single port procedure or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES).
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.