Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41526463›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026

Radial fan-based CO

A I de Jong, E Ghilotti, F Sterke, W van Weteringen, P J Tanis, B P L Wijnhoven, R M H Wijnen, R L Dellacà, J Vlot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

A I de JongDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. a.i.dejong@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0009-0002-4795-2562
E GhilottiDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
F SterkeDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
W van WeteringenDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
P J TanisDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
B P L WijnhovenDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
R M H WijnenDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
R L DellacàDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano University, Milan, Italy.
J VlotDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Health~Holland EMCLSH22029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopic insufflation with pressurized carbon dioxide (CO

methodsAdults undergoing elective intraperitoneal laparoscopic procedures were included. All procedures were performed using the RFBI and an 11 mm study trocar. Primary outcomes were safety, defined as the absence of serious or harmful adverse device effects (SADEs or ADEs), and feasibility, defined as completing the procedure without switching to a conventional insufflator. Secondary outcomes included pressure stability at the device outlet and documentation of observed events affecting pressure stability (e.g., trocar insertion/repositioning, leaks, suction, etc.).

resultsTwelve patients were enrolled, having a total RFBI insufflation time of 35.9 h in seven different laparoscopic procedures. No SADEs occurred. One ADE occurred while inserting a 5 mm instrument into the 11 mm study trocar that resulted in high air leakage, causing temporary loss of surgical workspace but no harm. All procedures were completed without the need to switch to a conventional insufflator. Pressure remained stable at both target pressures of 10 mmHg (median 10.0 mmHg, interquartile range (IQR) 0.12) and 14 mmHg (median 14.0 mmHg, IQR 0.15). The RFBI rapidly re-established the target pressure after observed events affecting stability, without manual intervention or procedural delay.

conclusionThis first-in-human study demonstrates that RFBI technology is safe, feasible, and capable of maintaining stable insufflation pressures across varied adult laparoscopic procedures. Radial fan-based insufflation effectively compensated for pressure fluctuations from ventilation and surgical events, warranting further evaluation of clinical benefits.

Indexed as

Carbon DioxideInsufflationLaparoscopyPneumoperitoneum, ArtificialAdultAgedEquipment DesignFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPressureCarbon DioxideInnovationInsufflationLaparoscopic surgeryPneumoperitoneumPressure stabilityRadial fan

Identifiers

PMID41526463
PMCPMC12881087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.