Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32085784›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020

Assessment of arthroscopic shavers: a comparison test of resection performance and quality.

Peng Liang, Gaiping Zhao, Xuelian Gu, Zhi Chen, Shaorong Xu, Weiguo Lai, Wentao Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peng LiangDepartment of Medical Instrument and Food Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9062-7656
Gaiping ZhaoDepartment of Medical Instrument and Food Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China. zgp_06@126.com.
Xuelian GuDepartment of Medical Instrument and Food Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.
Zhi ChenShanghai BJ-KMC Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Shaorong XuShanghai BJ-KMC Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Weiguo LaiShanghai Ligetai Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Wentao LiuDepartment of Medical Instrument and Food Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.
University of Shanghai for Science and Technology · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 11502146Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai 15ZR1429600
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArthroscopic shavers play an indispensable role in arthroscopic debridement. They have exquisite structures and similar designs. The purpose of this study was to establish a reproducible testing protocol to compare the resection performance and the quality (tensile strength, torsional strength, and corrosion resistance) of different arthroscopic shavers with comparable designs. We hypothesized that there could be little difference in resection performance and quality between these shavers.

methodsIncisor Plus Blade (IPB; Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA) and Double Serrated Plus Blade (DSPB; BJKMC, Shanghai, China) were selected for resection performance and quality test. For resection performance testing, the resection torque, which is the minimum torque required to cut off silicone blocks with the same cross-sectional area, was measured to evaluate the resection performance of shaver blades when the other factors remain the same. For quality testing, tensile and torsion tests of the shavers' joint part were performed, and ultimate failure load and maximum torque were measured and compared. The corrosion resistance of these blades was assessed by the boiling water test based on the ISO13402.

resultsNo significant difference existed in the resection torque between the shaver blades of IPB and DSPB (P = 0.54). To the failure load of shavers' joint parts, IPB was significantly higher than DSPB, both in the outer and inner blades (P < 0.0001). The maximum torque of the joint part had no significant difference between IPB and DSPB (for inner blades P = 0.60 and outer blades P = 0.94). The failure load (for both IPB and DSPB P < 0.0001) and maximum torque (for IPB P = 0.0475 and DSPB P = 0.015) of the inner blades were higher than those of the outer blades. No blemishes were observed on the surface of the blades after corrosion resistance tests.

conclusionsThis study provided some new methods to evaluate the resection performance and quality of different shavers. The resection performance, the torsional strength of the joint part, and the corrosion resistance of IPB and DSPB may show comparable properties, whereas the tensile strength of the shavers' joint part showed some level of difference.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchArthroscopyDebridementEquipment DesignHumansSurgical InstrumentsTensile StrengthCorrosion resistanceResection performanceShaver bladesTensile and torsion tests

Identifiers

PMID32085784
PMCPMC7033941
OpenAlexW3012943548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.