ArticleThe Laryngoscope2025
RADA-16 Reduces Postoperative Epistaxis After Inferior Turbinate Submucosal Resection.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Biomaterial Innovation to Surgical Practice: A Systematic Review of RADA16 Self-Assembling Peptide Hydrogel in Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- RADA-16 Reduces Postoperative Epistaxis After Inferior Turbinate Submucosal Resection.The Laryngoscope · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRADA-16 is a self-assembling peptide matrix with the ability to form a hydrogel structure, showing promise for improved wound healing and hemostasis. Our objective was to understand the utility of RADA-16 on postoperative bleeding rates following inferior turbinate submucosal resection (ITR) surgery. STUDY
designRetrospective study.
methodsElectronic health records of patients who underwent ITR surgery with a single surgeon from January 2020 to March 2024 were reviewed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine differences in postoperative epistaxis rates between RADA-16 and non-RADA-16 cohorts. Further analysis was performed to compare healthcare-associated costs.
resultsOur analysis included 985 patients who underwent ITR, of whom 571 received RADA-16 and 414 did not. Overall, 1.11% of patients experienced postoperative bleeding, 0.35% in the RADA-16 cohort and 2.17% in the non-RADA-16 cohort. Patients receiving RADA-16 had a significantly lower risk of postoperative hemorrhage (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.036-0.808, p = 0.026). Comparison of the two cohorts showed no significant difference in the prevalence of additional nasal surgery or bleeding disorders. The non-RADA-16 group was more likely to be on anticoagulation treatment (p < 0.001); however, no relationship between anticoagulant usage and bleeding episodes was observed. After cost-effectiveness analysis, we found the bleeding cost per patient was $379.74 for the RADA-16 group and $436.21 for the non-RADA-16 group (p = 0.36).
conclusionsRADA-16 is believed to improve wound healing and hemostasis. In our study, we found that patients receiving RADA-16 are less likely to experience epistaxis following ITR surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.