Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28643058›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2018

Prospective, randomized comparison of the use of FloShield Air System

S Bendifallah, E Salakos, I Naoura, P Aristizabal, E Furet, S Zilberman, M Ballester, E Darai

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02702531 (Prospective, Randomized Comparison of the Use of FloShield Air System ® Versus the Referenced Technic), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT02702531 phase4completednot on this map

Prospective, Randomized Comparison of the Use of FloShield Air System ® Versus the Referenced Technic (Water + Povidone-Iodine Solution) During Gynecologic Endoscopic Surgery to Evaluate the Operative Lens Vision Quality

TypeinterventionalSponsorTenon Hospital, ParisRan2016 to 2016Enrolled100ConditionsThe Performance Evaluations of the FloShield Defogging and Cleaning SystemArmsFloShield Defogging and Cleaning System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S BendifallahDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France. sofiane.bendifallah@aphp.fr.
E SalakosDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
I NaouraDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
P AristizabalDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
E FuretDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
S ZilbermanDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
M BallesterDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
E DaraiDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Tenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), University Pierre and Marie Curie, Paris 6, France.
Sorbonne Université · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe FloShield Air System MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a single-center randomized prospective study between March and June 2016 (Trials Database Registration NCT02702531) including 53 patients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery with water + PVI solution and 51 patients who underwent surgical procedures with the FloShield Air System. The primary outcome measure was the number of laparoscope removals during surgery. Secondary outcome measures were the time to clean, assessment of the quality of vision, the correlation between the laparoscopic surgical complexity and outcomes, and cost effectiveness.

resultsOverall, the mean patient age was 43.2 years (range 22-86) and body mass index 24.8 (range 16.8-42.7). The mean number of endoscope removals during surgery was 7.0 (range 0-37) in the water + PVI solution arm and 2.8 (range 0-12) in the FloShield Air System CONSLUSIONS: The FloShield Air System

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBody Mass IndexCarbon DioxideCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansLaparoscopesLaparoscopyLensesMiddle AgedPovidone-IodineProspective StudiesSolutionsCarbon DioxidePovidone-IodineSolutionsWaterGynecologic endoscopic surgeryLens vision qualityRandomized trial

Identifiers

PMID28643058
OpenAlexW2629985135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.