To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Surgical preparation for spine surgery: monopolar electrosurgery vs. ultrasound scissors

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
October 2014

Surgical preparation for spine surgery: monopolar electrosurgery vs. ultrasound scissors

Vol: 3| Issue: 10| Number:76| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Blood loss and operative duration using monopolar electrosurgery versus ultrasound scissors for surgical preparation during thoracoscopic ventral spondylodesis: results of a randomized, blinded, controlled trial

Eur Spine J. 2014 Aug;23(8):1783-90

Contributing Authors:
C Otto G Schiffer T Tjardes H Kunter P Eysel T Paffrath

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

41 patients with vertebral body fractures from T10 to L2 who required mono or bisegmental ventral spondylodesis were randomly divided into two groups. In one group, the surgical dissection was done using monopolar electrosurgery whereas in the other group, dissection was done using ultrasound scissors. The purpose of this study was to compare both preparation techniques for ventral thoracoscopic s...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue