ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
LigaSure versus Conventional Parotidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extracapsular Dissection Versus Superficial Parotidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Perioperative Efficiency.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialePooled it
- Extracapsular dissection versus superficial parotidectomy: real-world comparison of postoperative complications and facial nerve injury.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Exploring the Landscape of Salivary Gland Disorders: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of different surgical procedures for patients with hemorrhoids: a network meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Review
- Electrocautery, Harmonic, and Thunderbeat Instruments in Parotid Surgery: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery with parotidectomy is the preferable treatment for most parotid tumors. Our meta-analysis compared the differences between the use of the LigaSure (LS) device and the conventional suture ligation technique (CT) in parotidectomies. A literature search in databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was carried out. Studies including parotidectomy using LS and CT were included with the intraoperative and postoperative parameters collected. Continuous operative time data were measured by mean differences (MDs). Discrete data on postoperative complications, including facial palsy, postoperative bleeding, and salivary complications, were evaluated with risk differences (RDs). All values were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in operative time in the LS group (MD: -21.92; 95% CI, -30.18 to -13.66). In addition, the analysis indicated that the incidence of postoperative complications, including permanent facial palsy (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.05), temporary facial palsy (RD, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.04), salivary complications (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.06), and postoperative bleeding (RD, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.04), were all similar between the LS group and the CT group. According to the results, the LS device appears to be a safe and useful tool and could shorten the operative time in patients needing parotidectomy.
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.