ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Assessment of the aerosol distribution pattern of a single-port device for intraperitoneal administration of therapeutic substances.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): updated systematic review using the IDEAL framework.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Advancements in nebulizers for pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).Pleura and peritoneum · 2025Review
- Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC): The First Reported Case in Brazil Using Standardized Technique with the Capnopen® Nebulizer Device.The American journal of case reports · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the last 20 years, intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) has been explored as a modality for the management of peritoneal metastases of gynecologic, gastrointestinal, and primary peritoneal tumors. Direct delivery of chemotherapeutic agents to the peritoneal cavity space has proved superior to systemic chemotherapy when evaluating characteristics such as drug concentration reached in the peritoneal space, penetration into peritoneal metastases, and chemotherapy-related toxicity. Traditionally, IPC is delivered by peritoneal lavage with a liquid solution. This form of delivery has limitations, including inhomogeneous intraperitoneal distribution and limited ability to penetrate tissues and metastatic nodules. An alternative mode of delivery is so-called pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Within this context, the present study sought to identify the pattern of spatial distribution of therapeutic solutions aerosolized into the peritoneal space using a single-port PIPAC device and ascertain whether the aerosolized method is superior to the traditional (liquid) mode of IPC delivery.
methodsAnalysis of the rate of intra-abdominal staining with aerosolized 2% silver nitrate in five porcine models.
resultsAssessment of differences in stain impregnation between the upper, middle, and lower abdomen did not reveal significant differences (p = 0.42). The median sum scores were 1 for the upper abdomen and 3 for the middle and lower abdomen.
conclusionsAerosolization does not reach all regions of the abdomen homogeneously. However, adequate exposure of the upper abdomen, mid-abdomen, and lower abdomen to chemotherapeutic agents can be achieved with PIPAC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.