scholarly journals Conventional fractionation versus quad shot in advanced head-and-neck cancers: A randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 527
Author(s):  
Akansha Choudhary ◽  
Ajay Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Head And Neck Cancers ◽  
Advanced Head ◽  
Conventional Fractionation ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Effect of Stepped Care on Sexual Interest and Enjoyment in Distressed Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 100304
Author(s):  
Laura E.R. Schutte ◽  
Heleen C. Melissant ◽  
Femke Jansen ◽  
Birgit I. Lissenberg-Witte ◽  
C. René Leemans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Sexual Interest ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Stepped Care ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals A comparison of the Thunderbeat and standard electrocautery devices in head and neck surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. C. Kuipers ◽  
B. J. de Kleijn ◽  
J. Wedman ◽  
B. F. A. M. van der Laan ◽  
B. E. C. Plaat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Neck Surgery ◽  
Head And Neck Surgery ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Standard Instrumentation

Abstract Purpose New energy-based sutureless vessel ligation devices, such as the Thunderbeat (Olympus Medical Systems Corp., Tokyo, Japan), could reduce operative time and limit blood loss in head and neck surgery; however, efficacy and safety in major head and neck surgery have not been investigated in a prospective, randomized study. Methods This prospective, double-arm, randomized controlled trial consisted of two parts: total laryngectomy (TL) and neck dissection (ND). Thirty patients planned for TL were randomized in two groups. For the ND part, forty-two operative sides were likewise randomized. In both parts, Thunderbeat was used in addition to the standard instrumentation in the intervention groups, while only standard instrumentation was used in the control groups. Primary outcome values were blood loss, operative time and complication rate. Results For the TL part there was no difference in mean blood loss (p = 0.062), operative time (p = 0.512) and complications (p = 0.662) between both hemostatic techniques. For the neck dissection part, there was a reduction in blood loss (mean 210 mL versus 431 mL, p = 0.046) and in operative time (median 101 (IQR 85–130) minutes versus 150 (IQR 130–199) minutes, p = 0.014) when Thunderbeat was used. There was no difference in complication rate between both hemostatic systems (p = 0.261). Conclusion The Thunderbeat hemostatic device significantly reduces operative blood loss and operative time for neck dissections, without increase in complications. In TL, blood loss using Thunderbeat was comparable with the standard technique, but the operative time tended to be shorter. Trial registration UMCG Research Register, Reg. no. 201700041, date of registration: 18/1/2017

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document