Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26275545›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2016

What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review.

Denise M D Özdemir-van Brunschot, Kees C J H M van Laarhoven, Gert-Jan Scheffer, Sjaak Pouwels, Kim E Wever, Michiel C Warlé

6 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 6 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 73 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02654808 nacompletednot on this map

A Comparison of CO2 Absorption During Gynecologic Laparoscopy Using the AirSeal® Valveless Trocar System Versus Standard Insufflation Trocars at Intra-abdominal Pressures of 10 mmHg and 15 mmHg - a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorColumbia UniversityRan2016 to 2017Enrolled132ConditionsGynecologic DiseasesArmsAirSeal trocar, Standard trocar
NCT03179111 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Low Pressure Pneumoperitoneum in Bariatric Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversiti Putra MalaysiaRan2017 to 2018Enrolled94ConditionsSurgical View, Shoulder Tip Pain, Abdominal PainArmsPneumoperitoneum Pressure
NCT04671121 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

An Analysis of Cerebral Oximetry After Low Pressure Compared With Standard Pressure Pneumoperitoneum in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Prospective Randomized Parallel-Group Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorOndokuz Mayıs UniversityRan2020 to 2020Enrolled62ConditionsLaparoscopic Nephrectomy, Cerebral Oxygen SaturationArmsStandart pressure pneumoperitoneum, Low pressure pneumoperitoneum
NCT04949659 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Postoperative Pain in Children After Low-Pressure Versus Medium-Pressure Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Children's Hospital, ZurichRan2021 to 2026Enrolled250ConditionsAppendicitis AcuteArmsLaparoscopic appendectomy
NCT05530564 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Low-pressure Pneumoperitoneum on Pain and Inflammation in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of JordanRan2020 to 2021Enrolled100ConditionsPneumoperitoneum, Pain, Inflammatory ResponseArmslow-pressure pneumoperitoneum, standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum
NCT06783244 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Low Versus Standard Intraabdominal Pressure in Robot-assisted Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Double Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorVictoria RosbergRan2025 to 2027Enrolled200ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsLow intraabdominal pressure (8 mmHg)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 163 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Low vs Standard Pressures in Gynecologic Laparoscopy: a Systematic Review.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Reduced Laparoscopic Intra-abdominal Pressure During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Its Effect on Post-operative Pain: a Double-Blinded Randomised Control Trial.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Denise M D Özdemir-van BrunschotDivision of Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 10, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Denise.Ozdemir-vanBrunschot@radboudumc.nl.
Kees C J H M van LaarhovenDivision of Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 10, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Gert-Jan SchefferDepartment of Anesthesiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sjaak PouwelsDivision of Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 10, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Kim E WeverSystematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Michiel C WarléDivision of Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 10, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

methodsA systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum. RESULTS AND

conclusionsQuality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.

Indexed as

PressureAcute Kidney InjuryHepatic InsufficiencyHumansLaparoscopyPneumoperitoneum, ArtificialPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PainLaparoscopyLow pressurePainPerioperative conditionsPneumoperitoneum

Identifiers

PMID26275545
PMCPMC4848341
OpenAlexW1788874080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.