ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy outcomes with airseal® versus conventional insufflation: A single tertiary center comparative study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The AirSeal® Intelligent Flow System (IFS) is a valveless insufflation system that provides stable pneumoperitoneum and continuous smoke evacuation. While its safety and efficacy have been demonstrated in urologic surgery, evidence regarding its impact on perioperative outcomes in robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) remains limited. Objectives: To compare perioperative outcomes, postoperative complications, and opioid use between RAPN performed with AirSeal® versus conventional insufflation. Design: Retrospective comparative study using a prospectively maintained single-center database. Methods: We analyzed 208 consecutive patients who underwent elective RAPN at a tertiary care center between 2013 and 2023. Patients were divided into two groups based on the insufflation system used: AirSeal® (n=86) and conventional insufflation (n=122). Baseline demographics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes-including operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications (Clavien-Dindo classification), trifecta achievement, renal function, and postoperative opioid use-were compared. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests, independent t-tests, and univariate linear regression. Results: Baseline demographic, functional, and oncologic characteristics were comparable between groups. Use of AirSeal® was associated with significantly shorter operative time (-30.83 minutes, p<0.001), reduced estimated blood loss (-81.42 cc, p=0.003), and shorter hospital stay (-1.09 days, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications, trifecta achievement, renal functional outcomes, or postoperative opioid use between the two groups. Conclusion: The use of AirSeal® in RAPN is associated with improved perioperative efficiency, including shorter operative time, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospitalization, without compromising safety or functional outcomes. Further prospective and multicenter studies are warranted to validate these findings and assess cost-effectiveness.
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.