ArticleIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India2023
Harmonic Scalpel Tonsillectomy Versus Coblation Tonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
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 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of coblation versus harmonic scalpel methods among patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were systematically screened from inception until October 2022. The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference/standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model. Results: Six RCTs were analyzed, encompassing a sum of 461 patients (harmonic scalpel = 233 patients and coblation = 228 patients). The overall quality assessment was low risk of bias in two RCTs, some concerns of bias in three RCTs, and high risk of bias in one RCT. There was no significant difference between harmonic scalpel and coblation groups regarding the mean operative time (n = 6 RCTs, MD=-7.45 min, 95% CI [-15.26, 0.01], p = 0.06) mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 5 RCTs, MD=-36.03 ml, 95% CI [-77.46, 5.41], p = 0.09), and rate of postoperative hemorrhage (n = 5 RCTs, RR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.25, 1.39], p = 0.23). The overall postoperative pain score was significantly reduced in favor of the coblation group compared with the harmonic scalpel group (n = 5 RCTs, MD = 0.40, 95% CI [0.10, 0.69], p = 0.009)". Conclusions: The harmonic scalpel and coblation techniques share equal efficacy among patients undergoing tonsillectomy. The reduction in postoperative pain score provided by the coblation method is not clinically meaningful in clinical practice. Additional RCTs are needed to consolidate the power and quality of the presented evidence. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-023-04022-7.
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.