ArticleSurgery today2022
Measurement of particulate matter 2.5 in surgical smoke and its health hazards.
Article in Surgery today, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Randomized Single-Center Proof of Principle Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of a Hydrogel Laser Treatment Patch in Laser Hair Removal.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Trial
- Quantitative Analysis of Small Particles Present in Surgical Smoke Generated During Breast Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
- Surgical smoke exposure to patients and to healthcare workers in the operating room: a quantitative assessment.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Efficacy of an aerosol suction device and a drape in reducing surgical smoke exposure to patients and anesthesiologists: a prospective randomized controlled study.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Development of a new suction instrument to reduce surgical smoke exposure in the operating room.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Methods used for smoke evacuation in laparoendoscopic surgery: a technical review.Surgery today · 2025Review
- Thermal imaging and deep learning-based fit-checking for respiratory protection.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Surgical smoke and its components, effects, and mitigation: a contemporary review.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2024Review
- Surgical smoke: a matter of hygiene, toxicology, and occupational health.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurgical smoke is generated during the cauterization, coagulation, and incision of biological tissues by electrocautery, ultrasonic coagulation, incising devices, and lasers. Surgical smoke comprises water, water vapor, steam, and some particulate matter, including bacteria, viruses, cell fragments, and volatile organic compounds, which can pose health risks to the operating room personnel. In this study, we measured the concentration of particulate matter 2.5 (particles with a diameter of ≤ 2.5 μm) in surgical smoke.
methodsWe used digital dust counters for real-time monitoring of particulate matter 2.5 generated intraoperatively in breast and gastrointestinal surgeries performed at our hospitals between 2019 and 2020.
resultsConcentrations of particulate matter 2.5 were measured in surgical smoke generated when performing 14 different surgeries. Immediately after electrocautery, the concentration of particulate matter 2.5 increased to 2258 μg/m
conclusionSurgical smoke poses potential health risks to operating room personnel by contaminating their breathing zone with high concentrations of particulate matter 2.5. A local exhaust ventilation system is needed to reduce exposure.
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.