FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1719961152> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1719961152 abstract "Tonsillectomy is a very common operation and is performed using various surgical methods. Coblation is a popular method because it purportedly causes less pain than other surgical methods. However, the superiority of coblation is unproven.To compare the effects of coblation tonsillectomy for chronic tonsillitis or tonsillar hypertrophy with other surgical techniques, both hot and cold, on intraoperative morbidity, postoperative morbidity and procedural cost.The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 3); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 20 April 2017.Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of children and adults undergoing tonsillectomy with coblation compared with any other surgical technique. This review is limited to trials of extracapsular (traditional) tonsillectomy and excludes trials of intracapsular tonsil removal (tonsillotomy).We used the standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: patient-reported pain using a validated pain scale at postoperative days 1, 3 and 7; intraoperative blood loss; primary postoperative bleeding (within 24 hours) and secondary postoperative bleeding (more than 24 hours after surgery). Secondary outcomes were: time until resumption of normal diet, time until resumption of normal activity, duration of surgery and adverse effects including blood transfusion and the need for reoperation. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.We included 29 studies, with a total of 2561 participants. All studies had moderate or high risk of bias. Sixteen studies used an adequate randomisation technique, however the inability to mask the surgical teams and/or provide adequate methods to mitigate the risk of bias put nearly all studies at moderate or high risk of detection and measurement bias for intraoperative blood loss, and primary and secondary bleeding. In contrast most studies (20) were at low risk of bias for pain assessment. Most studies did not report data in a manner permitting meta-analysis.Most studies did not clearly report the participant characteristics, surgical indications or whether patients underwent tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy. Most studies reported that tonsillitis (infection) and/or tonsillar hypertrophy (obstruction) were the indication for surgery. Seven studies included only adults, 16 studies included only children and six studies included both. Pain At postoperative day 1 there is very low quality evidence that patients in the coblation group had less pain, with a standardised mean difference (SMD) of -0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.38 to -0.19; 538 participants; six studies). This effect is reduced a SMD of -0.44 (95% CI -0.97 to 0.09; 401 participants; five studies; very low-quality evidence) at day 3, and at day 7 there is low quality evidence of little or no difference in pain (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.19; 420 participants; five studies). Although this suggests that pain may be slightly less in the coblation group between days 1 and 3, the clinical significance is unclear. Intraoperative blood loss Methodological differences between studies in the measurement of intraoperative blood loss precluded meta-analysis. Primary and secondary bleeding The risk of primary bleeding was similar (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.05; 2055 participants; 25 studies; low-quality evidence). The risk of secondary bleeding was greater in the coblation group with a risk ratio of 1.36 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.95; 2118 participants; 25 studies; low-quality evidence). Using the median of the control group as the baseline risk, the absolute risk in the coblation group was 5% versus 3.6% in the control group. The difference of 1.3% has a 95% CI of 0.2% lower in the coblation group to 3.5% higher. Secondary outcomes Differences in study design and data reporting precluded the identification of differences in the time to resumption of normal diet or activity, or whether there was a difference in the duration of surgery.Although we could not feasibly compare the costs of equipment or operative facility, anaesthetic and surgical fees across different healthcare systems we used duration of surgery as a proxy for cost. Although this outcome was commonly reported in studies, it was not possible to pool the data to determine whether there was a difference.Adverse events other than bleeding were not well reported. It is unclear whether there is a difference in postoperative infections or the need for reoperation.The coblation technique may cause less pain on postoperative day 1, but the difference is small and may be clinically meaningless. By postoperative day 3, the difference decreases further and by postoperative day 7 there appears to be little or no difference. We found similar rates of primary bleeding but we cannot rule out a small increased risk of secondary bleeding with coblation. The evidence supporting these findings is of low or very low quality, i.e. there is a very high degree of uncertainty about the results. Moreover, for most outcomes data were only available from a few of the 29 included studies.The current evidence is of very low quality, therefore it is uncertain whether or not the coblation technique has any advantages over traditional tonsillectomy techniques. Despite the large number of studies, failure to use standardised or validated outcome measures precludes the ability to pool data across studies. Therefore, well-conducted RCTs using consistent, validated outcome measures are needed to establish whether the coblation technique has a benefit over other methods. In the included studies we identified no clear difference in adverse events. However, given the rarity of these events, randomised trials lack the power to detect a difference. Data from large-scale registries will provide a better estimate of any difference in these rare outcomes." @default.
• W1719961152 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1719961152 creator A5052811241 @default.
• W1719961152 creator A5054069874 @default.
• W1719961152 creator A5057611237 @default.
• W1719961152 creator A5069088460 @default.
• W1719961152 creator A5088219225 @default.
• W1719961152 date "2017-08-22" @default.
• W1719961152 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W1719961152 title "Coblation versus other surgical techniques for tonsillectomy" @default.
• W1719961152 cites W101256181 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W123261942 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1511793428 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1526024016 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1531836824 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1719961152 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1967309554 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1968367923 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1979307500 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1979674941 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1987384906 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1989557268 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1996218110 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1997769138 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W1997805086 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2000364393 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2003008932 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2008969946 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2013268584 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2021337024 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2022501166 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2025013580 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2031884602 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2033402289 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2033902064 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2036339881 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2037877467 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2038122212 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2039418122 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2040440775 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2041204055 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2043874777 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2046524056 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2067020494 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2069452640 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2080084977 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2085278420 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2087072498 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2088067522 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2096704399 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2096993200 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2101390958 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2105759366 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2106411081 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2108696783 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2115703046 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2132000639 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2138640215 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2140547865 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2145158233 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2148381973 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2149364543 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2157823046 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2163397548 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2164588577 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2169913462 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2268775356 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2364641707 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2367222870 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2409813374 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2444549870 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2595883550 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2611320035 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W2989091212 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W41986184 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W4236805817 @default.
• W1719961152 cites W4247333791 @default.
• W1719961152 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004619.pub3" @default.
• W1719961152 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6483696" @default.
• W1719961152 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28828761" @default.
• W1719961152 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W1719961152 type Work @default.
• W1719961152 sameAs 1719961152 @default.
• W1719961152 citedByCount "83" @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522012 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522013 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522014 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522015 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522016 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522017 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522018 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522019 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522020 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522021 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522022 @default.
• W1719961152 countsByYear W17199611522023 @default.
• W1719961152 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1719961152 hasAuthorship W1719961152A5052811241 @default.
• W1719961152 hasAuthorship W1719961152A5054069874 @default.
• W1719961152 hasAuthorship W1719961152A5057611237 @default.

• next