ArticleUpdates in surgery2024
Thyroid cartilage needle vs. endotracheal tube electrodes in EBSLN monitoring during thyroidectomy.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2024. 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.
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During thyroidectomy, both needle electrodes (NE) and endotracheal tube electrodes (ETE) can be used. Incomplete contact of the endotracheal tube electrode with the vocal cords, endotracheal tube electrode may hinder an optimal outcome and even result in an inability to obtain an electromyography wave while neuromonitoring the external branch of the superior laryngeal nerve (EBSLN). There is no study that compares NE and ETE for EBSLN monitoring. Therefore, this study compares NE and ETE recordings during EBSLN monitoring. Twenty-six consecutive patients undergoing total thyroidectomy were included in this study. Intraoperative neuromonitoring was performed simultaneously with both NEs and ETEs. Pre-resection (V1, R1, and S1) and post-resection (V2, R2, and S2) amplitudes and latencies were recorded for both types of electrodes. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. Twenty-one women and five men were included, and 52 nerves at risk were evaluated. The mean amplitudes for right S1 (314 vs. 168 µV, p = 0.009) and right S2 (428 vs. 161 µV, p: 0.001) and for left S1 (346 vs. 229 µV, p: 0.017) and left S2 (413 vs. 229 µV, p: 0.009) were statistically higher for the NE group. All amplitudes obtained using NEs, except on the left for V1, R1, V2, and R2, were statistically higher than those obtained using ETEs. There was no loss of signal or vocal cord palsy in the patients. There were no needle-related complications. EBSLN monitoring using NE is a safe alternative to ETE. With NE, higher amplitudes were obtained. Level of evidence: Level 3.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39235693What 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.