Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2026
High-Precision Electrosurgical Scalpel for Scarpa Sparing Abdominoplasty - Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Efficacy and Safety.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe dissection technique can influence abdominoplasty complication rates. New "bovie" tips have been developed to minimize thermal damage and optimize tissue dissection.
objectivesThe purpose of the present study was to perform a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of the dissection technique on several outcomes and complications after a Scarpa-sparing abdominoplasty, comparing a high-precision electrosurgical scalpel (HPES) with the conventional electroscalpel.
methodsThis prospective study was conducted at a single medical facility between June 2020 and February 2022 and enrolled patients who underwent Scarpa-sparing abdominoplasty. Forty female patients were included in the study and randomly assigned to either abdominoplasty performed using the conventional "bovie" tip (Group A) or a similar procedure using the HPES tip (Group B). The following variables were analyzed: patient characteristics, duration of suction drain use, drain output, complications (local and systemic), unscheduled visits, readmissions, and reoperation requirements.
resultsBoth groups exhibited similar general characteristics, differing only in body mass index. The HPES group showed a 23.6% significant reduction in total drain output and a trend toward lower daily outputs, peaking on day two with a 60.0% reduction in drain output. Local and systemic complications were similar, except for a trend toward lower wound dehiscence in the HPES group. Notably, no systemic complications occurred in either group.
conclusionOur findings support the safety and efficacy of the HPES tip for Scarpa-sparing abdominoplasty. This pilot randomized controlled trial demonstrated the benefits of substantially reducing drain output. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.