ArticleThe Laryngoscope2019
Investigation of surgical adhesives for vocal fold wound closure.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Balancing hemostasis and function: the impact of hemostatic materials on voice and swallowing outcomes in nerve-preserved thyroidectomy.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 · 2026Article
- Ultrasoft, adhesive, pH-tunable hydrogel based on in situ functionalized laser-induced graphene for through-hair concurrent biosensing.Science advances · 2026Article
- Plant derived tannic acid-based tissue adhesives: From mechanism to advanced design.Acta biomaterialia · 2026Review
- Multifunctional Double-Network Hydrogel with Porous, Adhesive, and Immunomodulatory Properties for Minimally Invasive Soft Tissue Repair.Small science · 2025Article
- High-Performance Dopamine-Based Supramolecular Bio-Adhesives.Macromolecular rapid communications · 2024Article
- Genetically Engineered Protein-Based Bioadhesives with Programmable Material Properties.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2023Article
- An Injectable, Shape-Retaining Collagen Hydrogel Cross-linked Using Thiol-Maleimide Click Chemistry for Sealing Corneal Perforations.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2023Article
- Crosslinking Efficacy and Cytotoxicity of Genipin and Its Activated Form Prepared by Warming It in a Phosphate Buffer: A Comparative Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Biosynthetic Hybrid Spidroin-Amyloid-Mussel Foot Protein for Underwater Adhesion on Diverse Surfaces.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesSurgical adhesives are increasingly used for vocal fold microsurgery to assist wound closure and reduce the risks of scar formation. Currently used vocal fold adhesives such as fibrin glue, however, have thus far not been found to promote wound closure or reduce scarring. The objectives of this study were to investigate the mechanical strength and the cytotoxicity of three commercially available adhesives (Glubran 2, GEM, Viareggio, Italy; BioGlue, CryoLife, Kennesaw, GA; and Tisseel, Baxter Healthcare, Deerfield, IL) for vocal fold wound closure.
methodsShear and tension tests were performed on 150 porcine larynges. The cytotoxicity of the adhesives to immortalized human vocal fold fibroblasts was investigated using neutral red uptake assays.
resultsThe average shear adhesive strength for Tisseel, BioGlue, and Glubran 2 was 13.86 ± 5.03 kilopascal (kPa), 40.92 ± 17.94 kPa, and 68.79 ± 13.29 kPa, respectively. The tensile adhesive strength for Tisseel, BioGlue, and Glubran 2 was 10.70 ± 6.42 kPa, 34.27 ± 12.59 kPa, and 46.67 ± 12.13 kPa, respectively. The vocal fold cell viabilities in extracts of Tisseel, BioGlue, and Glubran 2 were 99.27%, 43.05%, and 1.79%, respectively.
conclusionThere was a clear tradeoff between adhesive strength and toxicity. The maximum failure strength in shear or tension of the three surgical adhesives ranked from strongest to the weakest was: 1) Glubran 2, 2) BioGlue, and 3) Tisseel. Tisseel was found to be the least toxic of the three adhesives, whereas Glubran 2 was the most toxic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:2139-2146, 2019.
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.