Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32809161›Full record

Trial reportOral and maxillofacial surgery2021

Neck dissection with harmonic instruments and electrocautery: a prospective comparative study.

Luigi Angelo Vaira, Giacomo De Riu, Enrica Ligas, Giovanna Deiana, Gabriele Vacca, Olindo Massarelli, Pasquale Piombino, Bruno Carlo Brevi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Luigi Angelo VairaMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy. luigi.vaira@gmail.com.
Giacomo De RiuMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Enrica LigasMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Giovanna DeianaDirection, Hygiene and Hospital Infection Control Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Via Padre Manzella 4, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Gabriele VaccaMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Olindo MassarelliMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Pasquale PiombinoMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University of Naples "Federico II" Hospital, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Napoli, Italy.
Bruno Carlo BreviMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Pisa, Via Roma 67, 56126, Pisa, Italy.
University of Sassari · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana · ITUniversity of Naples Federico II · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHarmonic instruments are becoming popular in head and neck surgeries. In this prospective, randomized study, the efficacy of the harmonic instruments and electrosurgical technique is compared. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 48 patients undergoing unilateral neck dissection were divided into two groups. In one group, surgery was performed using conventional hemostatic instruments while in the other, only harmonic instruments were used. The two techniques were then compared with regard to intra- and post-operative blood loss, complications in operating time, drain, tracheotomy and nasogastric tube duration, and post-operative hospital stay.

resultsDifferences in operative time (P = 0.647), total suction drainage (P = 0.362) and time that drains (P = 0.404), nasogastric tube (P = 0.378), and tracheotomy (P = 0.052) were kept in place and proved not significant. The average blood loss during surgery was significantly greater in the CH group (P = 0.003) as the number of hemoclips and resorbable ligature used (P = 0.002).

conclusionsIn contrast to what has been reported up to now, our study did not reveal a net advantage in the use of harmonic instruments with respect to classical instruments in terms of surgical outcome. On the contrary, harmonic tools had a higher complication rate (i.e., salivary fistula and lymphatic leak) probably due to the decreased ability of this instruments to permanently close glandular structures and lymphatic ducts. In these cases, a closure technique such as electrocautery or classic knot-tying should be used.

Indexed as

ElectrocoagulationNeck DissectionHumansOperative TimeProspective StudiesSurgical InstrumentsElectrocauteryHarmonic bladeHarmonic scalpelNeck dissectionSurgical hemostasis

Identifiers

PMID32809161
OpenAlexW3081034269

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.