Trial reportOral and maxillofacial surgery2018
Use of ultrasonic scalpel and monopolar electrocautery for skin incisions in neck dissection: a prospective randomized trial.
Trial report in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- An umbrella review of the surgical performance of Harmonic ultrasonic devices and impact on patient outcomes.BMC surgery · 2023Pooled it
- The short-term outcomes of surgical scars in head and neck surgery comparing between surgical blade and geometric electron modulation electrocautery.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Trial
- Clinical assessment of patient-centered outcomes of diode laser ablation, electrocautery, blade scalpel surgery, and tissue punch for second-stage uncovering: a randomized controlled trial study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-Assisted Pocket Creation in Subglandular Breast Augmentation.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Resection of benign tumours of the submandibular gland with harmonic scalpel-assisted minimally extracapsular dissection.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Temperature and depth evaluation of the in vitro effects of femtosecond laser on oral soft tissue, with or without air-cooling.Lasers in medical science · 2019Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUltrasonic scalpel (UC) and monopolar electrocautery (ME) are standard equipment for soft tissue surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare intraoperative and postoperative patterns of patients using either UC or ME for skin incisions in neck dissection. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn a prospective randomized study of 30 patients, the thermal effects of UC (n = 15) and ME (n = 15) were examined using real-time infrared thermographic imaging. Additionally, tissue damage was evaluated histopathologically. The other measured variables were operation and bleeding time, postoperative pain score (only neck incision area), in-patient time, and complications.
resultsUC significantly reduces the thermal effects, compared to ME (p < 0.001). The mean depth of tissue damage (i.e., necrosis) was 272.7 μm for UC and 284.7 μm for ME with no significant difference (p = 0.285). From the third postoperative day, patients treated using UC had noticeably less pain in the neck incision area (t3 p = 0.010; t4 p < 0.001; t5 p < 0.005). Cutting time was reduced for ME by 36.1 s (p < 0.001) and the bleeding time was decreased by 40.9 s for UC (p < 0.001). The total preparation time was the same (p = 0.402). When comparing in-patient time (p = 0.723), as well as complications, no significant differences were seen.
conclusionUC results in less postoperative pain and less bleeding in the neck incision area. Accordingly, UC is superior to ME for skin incisions in neck 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.