ArticleOTO open
Complications Associated with Microdebriders in Otolaryngology Procedures from 2011 to 2021: A MAUDE Study.
Article in OTO open. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The microdebrider is a powered surgical instrument that is widely used in the field of otolaryngology. We aim to identify the type and frequency of device malfunctions, patient complications, and subsequent interventions related to the use of microdebriders. Study Design: Cross-sectional analysis. Setting: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2011 to 2021 Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Methods: The MAUDE database was queried for reports of "microdebrider," with adverse events selected that pertained to usage in head and neck surgeries from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2021. Results: There were 282 adverse events in 267 individual medical device reports (MDR). Although the majority of the reports did not specify the specific operation, endoscopic sinus surgery was the most common reported procedure (89, 33.3%). The most common cause of device malfunction was due to a broken piece (120, 48.2%) followed by overheating of the microdebrider motor (78, 31.3%). Of the reports which specified patient injury, the most commonly reported was "unintentional tissue damage," (10, 32.3%). Conclusion: The microdebrider has demonstrated utility within the field of otolaryngology, but is not without risk of malfunction that can cause patient injury. By understanding possible risks of microdebrider usage, including tissue damage, burns, and bleeds caused by device malfunction or operator error, physicians can be better prepared to address complications and educate patients.
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.