ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
A real-world study evaluating the safety and utility of a two-row stapler reload on pulmonary vasculature.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the utility of slow mode for pulmonary vessel resection using a surgical stapler in anatomical pulmonary resection: a prospective randomized controlled trial protocol.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Risk factors for vascular oozing or bleeding following transection with automatic staplers during uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
- Slow-firing mode reduces stump oozing during pulmonary vessel stapling.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Clinical utility of a small diameter four-row stapler reload for large vessel transection in lung transplants.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Efficacy of combined silk suture ligation and stapler versus stapler alone for vascular control in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Manual slow firing mode of Signia™ Stapling System can achieve less staple line bleeding from pulmonary artery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Impact of Narrow Anvil Stapler on Graft Vein Length in Right-sided Living-donor Nephrectomy.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Two Narrow-Profile Staplers Used in Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic staplers are common surgical devices used for the ligation and division of vasculature in thoracic procedures. When a stapler ligates and divides pulmonary vasculature, potentially catastrophic intraoperative bleeding at the staple-line may occur. The aim of this study was to confirm the safety and discuss the utility of a two-row stapler reload, by assessing the incidence of clinically necessary intraoperative hemostatic intervention when applied to pulmonary vasculature in real-world applications. Methods: This study was designed as a prospective non-comparative registry study conducted in seven centers across the United States, to confirm the safety and performance of Signia™ Small Diameter Reloads (SDR) when used for indicated thoracic surgical procedures. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hemostatic intervention related to the ligation and division of pulmonary arteries and veins. A five-point Likert scale scored hemostasis of each SDR staple-line. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of device-related only adverse events (AEs), device deficiencies, and procedure-related hospital readmission up to and including 30 days post operation. Results: SDR was fired 302 times across pulmonary vasculature in 120 subjects. Three firings required clinically necessary hemostatic intervention for an intervention rate of 0.99% (3 of 302 firings). Moreover, 97.5% (117 of 120 subjects) had intact SDR staple-lines regardless of surgical access or stapler handle preference. Only 4 (3.3%) thoracoscopic and robotic procedures converted to open, but none were due to SDR staple-lines. There was no statistically significant difference between the Likert score of transected arteries compared to veins (P=0.61). There were no device deficiencies or device-only related AEs reported. Conclusions: In this study, the two-row stapler reloads demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy profiles when fired across hilar vessels in the thoracic space with a 99% hemostatic rate, independent of surgical access and stapler handle preference.
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.