SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Impact of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on post-operative pain in robotic urological surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- An intra-operative checklist for low-impact robotic urologic surgery: a three-round J-ERUS/YAU Delphi consensus.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Emergency robotic-assisted repair in an elderly patient with strangulated hernia and active influenza A infection: A case report.World journal of virology · 2026Article
- Using an artificial intelligence-based device to investigate pain outcomes in robotic prostatectomy at low pressure pneumoperitoneum: The RALP clinical trial.BJUI compass · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic technology has revolutionised minimally invasive urological surgery, enhancing precision and minimising surgical complications. Recent evidence suggests that utilising lower pneumoperitoneum pressures improves clinical outcomes but the comparative impact on post-operative pain remains uncertain. This systematic review analyses the literature on low-pressure pneumoperitoneum to investigate its impact on pain and recovery following robotic-assisted urological surgeries, including prostatectomy, partial ephrectomy, and cystectomy. Post-operative opioid consumption, total operating time, estimated intra-operative bleeding, and total inpatient stay were investigated as secondary outcomes. PubMed, NHS Knowledge and Library Hub, Cochrane Central databases, and EMBASE were searched between January 2010 and May 2024. Any identified studies were reviewed against eligibility criteria by two independent authors prior to inclusion. The review was written in compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. Nine studies were included: six focused on prostatectomy, two on partial nephrectomy, and one on cystectomy. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum was found to result in reduced postoperative pain scores, particularly in the immediate recovery period and on postoperative day 1. Despite these improvements, post-operative opioid consumption remained consistent with standard pressures. The surgical workspace was not compromised when pneumoperitoneum pressures were lower. Lowering pneumoperitoneum pressures in robotic-assisted urological surgery appears to reduce immediate postoperative pain scores without increasing overall complications. This has not led to a noticeable reduction in post-operative opioid consumption. The lack of consistent reduction in opioid use and limited high-quality studies highlight the need for further research, particularly for partial nephrectomy and cystectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39960540What 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.