Trial reportBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2021
A Retrospective Study of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting with Low-Thermal Plasma Dissection Device Compared to Conventional Monopolar Electrosurgery.
Trial report in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2021. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful use of electrosurgery in an occipitocervical fusion procedure in a patient with an established cochlear implant: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this study is to compare the effects of conventional monopolar electrosurgery (CMES) and low-thermal plasma kinetic cautery (PKC) on complications such as bleeding, abnormal wound healing, pain, and drainage in patients who underwent on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
methodsThis retrospective clinical study included 258 patients undergoing CABG; the patients were randomized to PKC (PEAK PlasmaBlade, n=153) and CMES (n=105) groups. The patients' clinical data were examined retrospectively for biochemical variables, postoperative drainage, post-surgery erythrocyte suspension transfusion count, surgical site pain examined with visual analogue scale (VAS), and wound healing. Two-sided P-value > 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
resultsThe median post-surgery erythrocyte suspension transfusion number was significantly lower with PKC compared to CMES (0 [0-1] vs. 1 [1-4], respectively, P<0.001). Mean postoperative drain output and time until removal of drain tubes were significantly lower with PKC compared to CMES (300±113 vs. 547±192 and 1.95±1.5 vs. 2.44±1.8; P<0.001 and P=0.025, respectively). Mean VAS score for spontaneous and cough-induced pain were significantly lower with PKC compared to CMES (1.98±1.51 vs. 3.94± 2.09 and 3.76±1.46 vs. 5.6±1.92; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Reoperation due to bleeding was significantly higher with CMES compared to PKC (0 vs. 11 [7.2%], P=0.001).
conclusionUse of PKC during CABG considerably reduces postoperative drainage, need for blood transfusion, reoperation due to bleeding, and postoperative pain. PCK appears to be a good alternative to CMES for CABG.
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.