ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Two Narrow-Profile Staplers Used in Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of a narrow-profile, small-diameter reload to a powered vascular stapler when used during VATs lobectomy. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study comparing outcomes after VATs lobectomy procedures in which either the Echelon Flex™ powered vascular stapler (PVS) or a Signia™ small-diameter reload (SDR) was used to transect pulmonary vasculature. Data from adult patients (≥18 years of age) who had lung cancer and underwent elective, primary VATs lobectomy in the 3 years between 2021 and 2023 were extracted from the PINC AI healthcare database. Two patient groups (PVS vs SDR) were propensity-score matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor matching scheme with a caliper of 0.2 to adjust the baseline patient characteristic imbalance. Two sensitivity analyses were performed using multivariable regression models and propensity score inverse probability weighting. Results: Of 558 (34.1% SDR and 65.9% PVS) eligible inpatient cases, 68.5% age ≥65, 58.2% were female, 59.0% were married, 79.8% White, 68.5% were Medicare, 73.5% had comorbidity ≥3. One hundred and ninety pairs were matched. The incidence rate of blood transfusion was significantly higher in the PVS group than in the SDR group (PVS vs SDR: 6.4% vs 0.5% for matched pairs, difference: 5.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2%-9.5%, p = 0.002). The incidence rate of bleeding was not significantly different between the groups and no conversions were observed. Intensive care unit visits and length of stay were higher in the PVS group. Sensitivity analyses results were consistent with these findings. Conclusion: The narrow-profile SDR was an effective and beneficial tool for division and ligation during VATs lobectomy and is associated with fewer blood transfusions compared to PVS.
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.