ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
A Competitive Study on Midline Non-scalpel Vasectomy and the Traditional Methods of Vasectomy.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Midline non-scalpel vasectomy (NSV) has become a noninvasive method that has offered reduced pain and bleeding and shorter return to regular activities. Objective: This study was done to compare the midline NSV approach directly with the traditional scalpel-based vasectomy. Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative study involved 300 adult males who presented for vasectomy services in the Department of Surgery in CIMS, Chhindwara, MP, India. The patients were distributed in equal numbers into two groups: Group A received midline NSV, while Group B underwent traditional scalpel vasectomy. Data regarding operative time, complications, postoperative pain, satisfaction rates, and success in achieving azoospermia were collected. Results: Midline NSV demonstrated a significantly shorter operative time and lower intraoperative blood loss than the traditional method ( Conclusion: Midline NSV presents a valid and potentially superior alternative to conventional vasectomy techniques, with shorter operative time, fewer complications, and faster recovery while maintaining equivalent contraceptive efficacy. The results justify more widespread application of midline NSV in healthcare facilities offering vasectomy services.
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.