ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2023
Safety and usability of an endo staple line reinforcement device for pulmonary resections.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary resection can present technical challenges for surgeons due to the dissection and closure of tissues, which vary in thickness and elastic properties, occasionally leading to prolonged air leaks. Staple line reinforcements (SLRs) are widely utilized tools for fortifying the stability and integrity of closures in thoracic surgery, however, materials available and ease of use for both surgeon and scrub nurse have been suboptimal. A novel "click-and-go" device pre-loaded with bioabsorbable buttress material was recently developed, the Echelon Endopath SLR (ESLR, Ethicon, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, USA). This prospective study examines the safety and efficacy of this novel device in lung resections. Methods: Adult surgical candidates undergoing primary pulmonary resection (both open and thoracoscopic) where the ESLR would be used were enrolled. Exclusion included reoperation/revision in same anatomical location, hypersensitivity to polyglactin or related products, and body mass index (BMI) ≥46.0 kg/m Results: A total of 131 subjects were included in the primary endpoint analysis data set with 120 subjects completing the study (91.6%). The mean age at consent was 62.8±12.0 years and 55.7% were female. The most common primary indication for the procedure was malignancy 61.1%, and primary non-malignant lung disease (non-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) 12.2%. Common procedures performed were wedge resection (58.0%) and lobectomy (34.4%). There were zero reported device-specific/-related AEs which counted toward the primary endpoint. Responses from a usability questionnaire found all surgeons (100.0%) reported the ease of setup was superior to previous devices utilized. Surgeons expressed greater confidence in the buttress material of the ESLR than that of previous SLR devices (strongly agree 88.9%; slightly agree 11.1%). Most also felt that there was less wastage with the click-and-go ESLR (strongly agree 77.8%, slightly agree 11.1%, neutral 11.1%). Conclusions: The ESLR device demonstrates safe and effective performance in this post-market study of specific thoracic procedures. Furthermore, surgeons found this was easier to use.
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.