ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2025
Comparison of advanced bipolar
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 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: Single-incision laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernia repair (SILTEP) is a minimally invasive technique for inguinal hernia that promotes faster recovery. Advanced bipolar (AB) energy devices have recently emerged, offering several benefits in surgical outcomes. This study aimed to compare AB and conventional monopolar (CM) energy devices to assess their impact on surgical outcomes in SILTEP and to evaluate the necessity of using AB devices. Methods: A retrospective comparative analysis was conducted involving 304 patients who underwent SILTEP, divided into the CM and AB groups based on the energy device used. Patient characteristics, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the groups. Results: The AB group exhibited longer operation times but similar morbidity rates compared to the CM group (53.5 ± 21.0 minutes Conclusion: AB energy devices may offer advantages for SILTEP, including reduced intraoperative blood loss. AB energy devices may be useful and viable options for SILTEP. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.
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.