Rahbari 2014.

Methods	Randomised clinical trial
Participants	Country: Germany Number randomised: 130 Postrandomisation dropouts: 0 (0%) Revised sample size: 130 Average age: 61 years Women: 60 (46.2%) Number of cirrhotics: 2 (1.5%) Number of major liver resections: 73 (56.2%) Number of right hepatectomies: 43 (33.1%) Follow‐up (months): until discharge Further details of methods of liver resection Vascular occlusion: factor being randomised Parenchymal transection: variable Fibrin glue: variable Pharmacological methods: not stated Cardiopulmonary methods: low central venous pressure Autologous transfusion: not stated Inclusion criteria Patients undergoing liver resection A minimum age of 18 years Feasibility of stapler and clamp‐crushing transection techniques based on preoperative imaging (absence of a fairly curved or angled resection line) Exclusion criteria Concomitant extrahepatic resection was planned Already participating in concurrent intervention trials Expected lack of compliance were also excluded Impaired mental state or language difficulties
Interventions	Participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups. Group 1: clamp‐crush method (n = 65) Group 2: stapler resection (n = 65) Stapler: Autosuture EndoGIA stapler (Covidien)
Outcomes	The outcomes reported were: short‐term mortality, proportion of people with serious adverse events, proportion of people with any adverse events, operative blood loss, quantity of blood transfused (red cell transfusion or whole blood), quantity of blood transfused (fresh frozen plasma), length of hospital stay, length of intensive therapy unit stay, and operating time.
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "A block randomisation list is generated by the Institute for Medical Biometrics and Informatics (IMBI) applying SAS (SAS™ Version 9.1., SAS Institute Inc., Cary, USA) ".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Randomization was carried out during surgery using consecutively numbered opaque and sealed envelopes, once the operating surgeon had confirmed resectability".
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Patients were blinded to the study intervention. Blinding of the staff in the operating room was not feasible".
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "Therefore, a third party blinded to the allocated treatment group assessed postoperative outcomes".
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comment: there were no postrandomisation dropouts.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Comment: mortality and morbidity were reported.
Vested interest bias	High risk	Quote: "The trial was funded by the Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Germany. M.K., P.S., M.W.B and J.W. received speaker's honoraria from Covidien".
Other bias	Low risk	Comment: no other bias