Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31087150›Full record

Trial reportEuropean 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 Surgery2019

Comparison of two modern and conventional tonsillectomy techniques in terms of postoperative pain and collateral tissue damage.

Mehmet Fatih Boğrul, Asude Ünal, Fatih Yılmaz, Mehmet Eser Sancaktar, Mustafa Bakırtaş

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in 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, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Evaluation of Anterior and Posterior Pillar Suturing Following Adult Tonsillectomy in Terms of Hemorrhage, Pain, and Dysphagia Complications.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2022
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mehmet Fatih BoğrulDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Ergani State Hospital, Ministry of Health, Diyarbakır, Turkey.
Asude ÜnalDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, University of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Health, Samsun, Turkey.
Fatih YılmazDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, University of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Health, İzmir, Turkey.
Mehmet Eser SancaktarDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, University of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Health, Samsun, Turkey. eser_sancak@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1498-5539
Mustafa BakırtaşDepartment of Pathology, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, University of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Health, Samsun, Turkey.
Ministry of Health · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the tonsillectomy operations performed with bipolar radiofrequency clamp (BRC), plasma blade (PB), and cold dissection (CD) techniques in terms of postoperative pain and collateral tissue damage.

methodsThis is a prospective randomized comparative cohort study conducted in a tertiary hospital. A total of 50 patients who underwent tonsillectomy in our institution met the inclusion criteria. Based on the tonsillectomy technique, patients were randomly divided into 3 groups as BRC (CURIS®) (n:20), PB (PEAK Surgical) (n:20), and CD (n:10). The patients were given a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain evaluation on the 1st postoperative day (3rd h) and on the 3rd and 6th days after discharge. The deepest and the most superficial necrosis depths were examined under the light microscope (Olympus BX53, Japan) by the same single blinded pathologist.

resultsThe age of the patients included in the study ranged from 5 to 45 years. The mean age was 14.5 years. Twenty-four of the patients were female, 26 were male. Mean 3rd h and 3rd day VAS scores for pain in the BRC group were significantly higher than the other two groups (p < 0.001). Although PB group had higher VAS scores compared with CD group, the difference was not significant (p > 0.05). The deepest necrosis depths (dND) in patients who were operated with BRC was significantly greater compared to patients operated with PB (p < 0.01), whereas no significant difference was observed between the techniques regarding the most superficial necrosis depth (msND) (p > 0.05). For patients operated with CD technique, only ischemic fields were observed.

conclusionBoth BRC and PB techniques seem to not provide significant advantage compared with conventional CD technique in terms of postoperative pain. Necrosis depths in tonsillectomy specimens due to thermal damage positively correlate with the postoperative pain level.

Indexed as

ElectrocoagulationPalatine TonsilPostoperative PainTonsillectomyAdolescentDissectionFemaleHumansMalePain MeasurementTonsillitisTreatment OutcomeTurkeyVisual Analog ScaleBipolar radiofrequency clampCold dissectionNecrosis depthPlasma bladePostoperative painTonsillectomy

Identifiers

PMID31087150
OpenAlexW2945041450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.