ReviewJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale
Reasonable Risk Ratio of Palate Surgery: A New Critical Analysis.
Review in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale. 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
OBJECTIVE.: A new critical complication risk analysis, the reasonable risk ratio (RRR or R METHODS.: Analysis from published meta-analyses, systematic reviews on success rates, and complications encountered for 3 palate surgeries, expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP), barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP) and modified uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (mUPPP), over 20 years. The RRR is derived from a ratio of the percentage of each respective complication over the success rate of that particular surgical procedure. The benchmark RRR of tonsillectomy is set at 0.035 to 0.078. An RRR below this benchmark value is more favorable as tonsillectomy is a widely accepted ENT procedure with risks to benefit well accepted. RESULTS.: The RRR for foreign body (FB) sensation (BRP) ranged from 0.03 to 0.23 (mean RRR of 0.14), FB sensation (ESP) 0.01, FB sensation (mUPPP) ranged from 0.33 to 0.55 (mean RRR of 0.44). The RRR for swallowing difficulties (BRP) ranged from 0.04 to 0.23 (mean RRR of 0.11), mUPPP, was 0.37; no reported swallowing difficulties with the ESP. The RRR for velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) (BRP) ranged from 0.009 to 0.18 (mean RRR of 0.07), and RRR VPI (mUPPP) was 0.14. The RRR (BRP) for dry throat was 0.06 and the mUPPP was 0.35, with no reported VPI or dry throat for ESP. The overall RRR for the BRP was 0.09, ESP was 0.01 and mUPPP was 0.29. CONCLUSION.: RRR provides a summarized data-driven, statistical guide to aid decision-making, and helps in patient counseling. BRP and ESP have been shown to have less complications compared to mUPPP.
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.