ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2019
Development of cadaver perfusion models for surgical training: an experimental study.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePerfusion techniques on cadavers are heterogeneous and imperfect. The objective of this study was to improve the existing circulation model for surgical simulation on cadavers.
methodsWe used a three-step experimental approach. The first part of the experiment tested two variables: the type of circuit and the use of a heater for perfusion. The second approach evaluated two parameters: the injection fluid and the type of body conditioning (embalmed or freshly dead prepared using different washing techniques). The third one was an improvement on the best circulation obtained, which focused on the injection fluid. To compare the realism of these different techniques, we constructed a score with realism parameters: the volume of return flow, the presence of peripheral venous return and the perfusion of abdominal arteries.
resultsWe found that the use of a heater seemed to improve the perfusion, while performing an arteriovenous bypass did not seem very effective. A correlation rate of 0.84 was found between the realism score and the injected fluid chosen. The best score (4/6) was found for a non-embalmed body with a low-pressure washing technique using a gelatin-based liquid at a concentration of 4 g/L for circulation. Scores obtained using embalmed bodies for both injection fluids for high-pressure washing or for 8-g/L gelatin injection fluid did not exceed 3/6.
conclusionsWe showed that using a non-embalmed body with low-pressure washing and a 4-g/L gelatin-based fluid was the most effective technique for cadaver perfusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30989350What 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.