ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Reprocessed single-use devices in laparoscopy: assessment of cost, environmental impact, and patient safety.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04226482 (Comparison of Lateral Thermal Damage and Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Appendectomy With New Versus Reused Ultrasonic Scalpel in Patients With Acute Appendicitis - Randomized Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Comparison of Lateral Thermal Damage and Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Appendectomy With New Versus Reused Ultrasonic Scalpel in Patients With Acute Appendicitis - Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of new versus reused Harmonic scalpel performance in laparoscopic appendectomy in patients with acute appendicitis-a randomized clinical trial.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Trial
- Ultrasonic Scalpel vs. Polymeric Clip Laparoscopic Varicocelectomy in Adolescents with Symptomatic Varicocele.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Remanufacturing of single-use medical devices: a case study on cross-border collaboration between the UK and Nigeria.Health and technology · 2022Review
- Assessing organic material on single-use vessel sealing devices: a comparative study of reprocessed and new LigaSure™ devices.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Identifiers
29905894What 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.