ArticleSpringerPlus2016
A randomized controlled study comparing a vessel sealing system with the conventional technique in axillary lymph node dissection for primary breast cancer.
Article in SpringerPlus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Contrast of Mastoscopic and Conventional Axillary Lymph Node Dissection of Patients With Breast Cancer: Meta-Analysis.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterPooled it
- Bipolar vessel sealing system versus silk ligation of lymphatic vessels in renal transplant recipient lymphatic complications: a randomized controlled trial.International urology and nephrology · 2021Trial
- Review
- Reduction of seroma by pectoralis fascia dissection using an energy device in total mastectomy for breast cancer: An observational study.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Total Sealing Technique (TST) with a bipolar vessel sealing system reduces lymphorrhea and seroma formation for axillary lymph node dissection in primary breast cancer.Surgery open science · 2024Article
- Significance of skeletal muscle index-to-body mass index ratio as a predictor of post-surgical bleeding after mastectomy in patients with breast cancer.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Advanced hemostasis in axillary lymph node dissection for locally advanced breast cancer: new technology devices compared in the prevention of seroma formation.BMC surgery · 2019Article
- Modern lymphatic dissection techniques for preventing post renal transplant lymphocele.Clujul medical (1957) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the newest bipolar vessel sealing system (BVSS; LigaSure™ Small Jaw) to that of conventional technique in axillary dissection.
methodsSixty-one patients with breast cancer were randomized to a conventional dissection surgical technique (CONV group; n = 30) by scalpel and monopolar cautery or that using a vessel sealing system (BVSS group; n = 31).
resultsThere was a significant difference between both groups in the mean number of days until drain removal (6.4 ± 2.9 vs. 8.2 ± 3.8 days; P value = 0.033), and the mean total volume of drainage fluid (365.3 ± 242.2 vs. 625.1 ± 446.6 mL; P value = 0.009). The incidence of seroma was similar in both groups (43.3 vs. 37.9 %; P value = 0.673). There was no statistically significant difference in axillary dissection operating time (66 vs. 70 min; P value = 0.371), or the mean volume of blood loss (18.2 ± 31.1 vs. 20.6 ± 26.3 mL; P value = 0.663).
conclusionsOur results suggest that BVSS is a more effective device when compared to the conventional techniques in axillary dissection.
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.