Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951599›Full record

ArticleBJS open2017

Randomized clinical trial of ultrasonic scissors versus conventional haemostasis to compare complications and economics after total thyroidectomy (FOThyr).

C Blanchard, F Pattou, L Brunaud, A Hamy, M Dahan, M Mathonnet, C Volteau, C Caillard, I Durand-Zaleski, E Mirallié and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJS open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01551914 (Medico-economic Evaluation Comparing the Use of Ultrasonic Scissors to the Conventional Techniques of Haemostasis in Thyroid Surgery by Cervicotomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01551914 phase3unknown statusnot on this map

Medico-economic Evaluation Comparing the Use of Ultrasonic Scissors to the Conventional Techniques of Haemostasis in Thyroid Surgery by Cervicotomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorNantes University HospitalRan2012 to 2015Enrolled1,350ConditionsThyroid TumorArmsUltrasonic Scissors (Ethicon), Bipolar Electrosurgical instruments (Medtronic) (SLS- Clips)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

C BlanchardClinique de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Nantes Nantes France.
F PattouChirurgie Générale et Endocrinienne, CHU Lille Université de Lille Lille France.
L BrunaudService de Chirurgie Digestive, Hépato-Biliaire et Endocrinienne CHU Nancy - Hôpital de Brabois Nancy France.
A HamyChirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne CHU Angers Angers France.
M DahanChirurgie Thoracique, Pôle Voies Respiratoires CHU de Toulouse - Hôpital Larrey Toulouse France.
M MathonnetChirurgie Digestive, Générale et Endocrinienne CHU de Limoges - Hôpital Dupuytren Limoges France.
C VolteauDépartement Promotion Délégation à la Recherche Clinique et à l'Innovation Nantes France.
C CaillardClinique de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Nantes Nantes France.
I Durand-ZaleskiAssistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris Unité de Recherche Clinique en Économie de la Santé d'Île-de-France Hôpital de l'Hôtel-Dieu Paris France.
E MiralliéClinique de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Nantes Nantes France.
FOThyr Group
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRCentre d'Investigation Clinique de Nantes · FRCentre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse · FRUniversité de Lille · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe benefits of single-use ultrasonic scissors in thyroid surgery are still debated. Although this device has been shown to reduce operating time compared with conventional haemostasis, its cost-effectiveness has never been demonstrated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic scissors for total thyroidectomy.

methodsThis was a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial conducted at 13 hospital sites. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with hypocalcaemia (serum calcium level below 2 mmol/l) on day 2. Secondary endpoints included postoperative complications and costs, with calculation of incremental cost differences and cost-effectiveness ratios.

resultsIn total, 1329 patients who underwent total thyroidectomy were included in the analysis: 670 were randomized to treatment with ultrasonic scissors and 659 to conventional haemostasis. There was no difference between groups in the rate of complications, including hypocalcaemia on day 2 (19

conclusionUltrasonic scissors were no more clinically effective than conventional haemostasis, but use of these devices was more costly. Registration number: NCT01551914 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Identifiers

PMID29951599
PMCPMC5989994
OpenAlexW2613279559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.