ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2026
Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLow-pressure (LP) pneumoperitoneum (intra-abdominal pressure [IAP] <12 mmHg) has been proposed to reduce pain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), but earlier syntheses combined randomized with non-randomized data, pooled mixed urological procedures, or applied variable pressure definitions. We synthesized the randomized evidence restricted to RARP.
methodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched to 30 April 2026. RCTs comparing IAP <12 mmHg with IAP ≥12 mmHg in adults undergoing RARP were eligible. Every extracted value was verified against the source publication. Mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios were pooled under random-effects models with Hartung-Knapp sensitivity analyses; trial sequential analysis used outcome-appropriate required information sizes, and certainty was rated with GRADE.
resultsFive RCTs enrolling 576 patients (280 LP, 296 SP) were included. Pain did not differ at the earliest postoperative assessment (3 trials, n=277; MD -0.43 points, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.28) nor at 1, 6, 12 or 24 h, and opioid consumption was unchanged. The information needed to detect a 1-point pain difference had been accrued without the trial sequential monitoring boundary being crossed. LP was associated with greater blood loss (MD +44.7 mL, +6.0 to +83.5) and longer surgery (MD +7.5 min, +1.2 to +13.9), with no difference in transfusion, complications, ileus or length of stay.
conclusionRandomized evidence shows no analgesic benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in RARP at any assessed time point, and the associated increases in blood loss and operative time are too small to matter clinically. Current evidence supports neither routine adoption nor avoidance; pressure should be individualized to surgical exposure, bleeding risk, and cardiopulmonary tolerance. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD420261396874.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42714791What 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.