Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2018
Ultrasonic versus monopolar energy-based surgical devices in terms of surgical smoke and lateral thermal damage (ULMOST): a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applications of different energy devices in laparoscopic and robotic gynecological surgery: a systematic review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Pooled it
- An umbrella review of the surgical performance of Harmonic ultrasonic devices and impact on patient outcomes.BMC surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Consistency of global recommendations regarding open versus laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.ANZ journal of surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Electrosurgical Devices Used During Laparoscopic Hysterectomy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Tissue effects of advanced energy devices: a systematic review and descriptive analysis of vascular sealing and lateral thermal damage in human tissue.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Changes in ultrasonic scalpel performance and characterization following gastric cancer surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Comparative in vivo assessment of surgical smoke particle exposure from different energy modalities during gynecologic laparoscopy.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Quantifying lens obstructions in minimally invasive surgery: the impact on performance and outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
- Comparing Thermal Damage Using Monopolar Hook Versus Harmonic Scalpel in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy; A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2024Article
- Surgical smoke: a matter of hygiene, toxicology, and occupational health.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2024Review
- The risk of COVID-19 transmission by laparoscopic smoke may be lower than for laparotomy: a narrative review.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Review
- Surgery in the COVID-19 Era: A Narrative Review.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the degree of surgical smoke or vapor and lateral thermal damage caused by two different energy-based surgical devices (ESDs) used in colpotomy during total laparoscopic hysterectomy.
methodsPatients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy were randomly assigned to an ultrasonic ESD group (n = 20) or monopolar ESD group (n = 20). Colpotomy was performed using the assigned ESD. The degree of surgical smoke or vapor obstructing the laparoscopic view was assessed by two independent reviewers using a 5-point Likert scale, in which a higher score indicates worse visibility. The degree of the lateral thermal damage was measured as the width from the point of instrument application to the margins of the unchanged nearby tissue using a light microscope.
resultsThe baseline characteristics did not statistically differ between the two groups. The degree of surgical smoke or vapor obstructing vision was 1.2 ± 0.8 points in the ultrasonic group and 3.9 ± 0.7 points in the monopolar groups (p < 0.001). The lateral thermal damage was significantly increased in the monopolar group compared to in the ultrasound group (1500 µm [1200-2500 µm] vs. 950 µm [650-1725 µm], p = 0.037).
conclusionUltrasonic ESD had better laparoscopic visibility and caused less lateral thermal damage during colpotomy compared to monopolar device.
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.