ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Comparative Analysis of Electrocautery Versus LigaSure Energy-based Device for Anterolateral Thigh Free Flap Dissection.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The anterolateral thigh (ALT) free flap is widely used in reconstructive surgery, but intramuscular perforator dissection remains technically demanding and time-consuming. Electrocautery may cause collateral thermal injury and slower dissection rates. Advanced bipolar energy devices, such as LigaSure, offer precise vessel sealing with reduced thermal spread, potentially enabling faster and more controlled dissection. This study aimed to directly compare electrocautery with LigaSure during ALT flap harvest, evaluating dissection efficiency and operative duration. Methods: A combined retrospective-prospective study was conducted. Group A retrospectively analyzed 20 ALT flaps by a single surgeon (10 with electrocautery, 10 with LigaSure), comparing flap harvest time. Group B prospectively analyzed 10 ALT flaps, where 2 surgeons each alternately dissected a perforator within the same flap using either electrocautery or LigaSure, facilitating direct comparison. Primary outcomes were flap harvest time and perforator dissection speed (time per centimeter of perforator length). Results: LigaSure significantly reduced flap harvest time. In group A, flap harvest time was shorter with LigaSure versus electrocautery. In group B, perforator dissection was significantly faster with LigaSure, averaging 11.5 versus 39.4 minutes with electrocautery. Normalized to perforator length, LigaSure achieved 1.61 minutes per centimeter compared with 6.29 minutes per centimeter with electrocautery, approximately 3.9 times faster ( Conclusions: LigaSure significantly enhances ALT flap dissection efficiency, especially along the intramuscular perforator course, thereby reducing flap harvest time. Its adoption can streamline workflow and improve procedural consistency in ALT flap harvest.
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.