Use of Skin Staplers in Head and Neck Surgery: Prospective Clinical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the advantages and disadvantages of skin staplers versus conventional sutures in head and neck surgery. SUBJECTS: Fifty consecutive patients who underwent extensive surgery in the head and neck area were included in this prospective trial. METHODS: Patients were randomized into two equal groups: one group had their wounds closed with staplers and the other with monofilament sutures. The main outcome measures were speed of suturing, wound healing and cosmetic result, complications, and cost of either method. RESULTS: Cosmetic results were good in both groups. Neither group had any complications. Wound closure speed was 18.9 +/- 1.4 cm/min when using skin staplers and 1.9 +/- 0.4 cm/min for conventional suturing (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Skin staplers significantly reduce wound closure time and yield similar cosmetic results with no complications and with only a slightly higher cost of suturing material.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".