ArticleScientific reports2024
Development of novel rectal/uterine clamping device.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We developed a novel clamping device for laparoscopic surgery, free from conventional pinch structure, capable of uniformly occluding any ductal organ. This study aimed to evaluate performance of the new clamper compared to the pinch-type clamper. The new clamper consists of two metal bars with ties at each end, which enables parallel clamping. A resected porcine stomach was used, with an infusion tube at the anal end to increase intra-luminal pressure. The oral side of the stomach was clamped with either the new clamper or the pinch-type clamper, and their performances were evaluated in qualitative and semi-quantitative manner. Qualitative evaluation involved imaging the clamping site at intra-gastric pressures from 0 to 15 mmHg using microfocus computed tomography. The new clamper showed no gap even under increased intra-luminal pressure, while the pinch-type clamper showed a gap on the distal side. Quantitative evaluation measured bursting pressure under continuous air insufflation. Air leakages were observed in the new clamper at higher intra-luminal pressures than in the pinch-type clamper (46.1 mmHg vs. 13.6 mmHg, P < 0.01). Our new clamping device showed superior performance in preclinical setting compared to the conventional pinch-type clamper. We are currently working on its design freezing and aiming for early commercialization.
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.