ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effects of different powers of high-frequency electrotome on perioperative period of neck dissection.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the effect of varying power levels of high-frequency electrosurgical units on the perioperative period of unilateral modified radical neck dissection.
methodThis study included 180 patients who underwent unilateral modified radical neck dissection at a single center between October 2019 and February 2024. A retrospective analysis research method was used to divide the patients into a high-power group (30 W), a medium-power group (25 W), and a low-power group (20 W), with 60 cases in each group. Various indicators in the perioperative period were compared among the three groups.
resultsThe higher power level of the high-frequency electrosurgical unit was associated with shorter operation times (P < 0.05) and reduced intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.05). The total postoperative drainage volume was higher among patients in the high-power group than that among the medium- and low-power groups (P < 0.05). The length of hospital stay was shorter among patients in the low-power group than among those in the high-power group (P < 0.05). Pain scores, wound healing rate, infection rate and the incidence of unplanned reoperation were lower among patients in the low-power group than among those in the high-power group (P < 0.05).
conclusionThis study recommends the use of lower electrosurgical power settings whenever feasible, provided that the procedure can be completed effectively. For patients who are unable to tolerate prolonged procedures or for whom substantial intraoperative bleeding is anticipated, increasing the electrosurgical power setting may help mitigate blood loss and shorten operative duration.
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.