English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective  To compare the suitability of CO 2  laser with steel instruments for margin excision in transoral laser microsurgery.    Methods  Prospective randomized blinded study. Patients with glottic cancer undergoing laser resection were randomized to margin excision by either steel instruments or CO 2  laser. Margins were analyzed for size, interpretability and degree of artifact by a pathologist who was blinded to technique.    Results  45 patients were enrolled in the study with 226 total margins taken. 39 margins taken by laser had marked artifact and 0 were uninterpretable. 20 margins taken by steel instruments had marked artifact, and 2 were uninterpretable. Controlling for margin size, the laser technique was associated with increasing degrees of margin artifact (p = 0.210), but there was no difference in crude rates of uninterpretability (p = 0.24).    Conclusion  Laser margin excision is associated with a greater degree of artifact than steel instrument excision, but was not associated with higher rate of uninterpretability.

CO2 laser versus cold steel margin analysis following endoscopic excision of glottic cancer