Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35288930›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

Xudong Yang, Yao Cheng, Nansheng Cheng, Jianping Gong, Lian Bai, Longshuan Zhao, Yilei Deng

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Research progress on post-laparoscopic shoulder pain after gynecologic surgery.The Journal of international medical research · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Xudong YangDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Yao ChengDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Nansheng ChengDepartment of Bile Duct Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jianping GongDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Lian BaiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Yongchuan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Longshuan ZhaoDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Yilei DengDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University · CNChongqing Medical University · CNDalian Medical University · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013 and last updated in 2017. Laparoscopic surgery is now widely performed to treat various abdominal diseases. Currently, carbon dioxide is the most frequently used gas for insufflation of the abdominal cavity (pneumoperitoneum). Although carbon dioxide meets most of the requirements for pneumoperitoneum, the absorption of carbon dioxide may be associated with adverse events. Therefore, other gases have been introduced as alternatives to carbon dioxide for establishing pneumoperitoneum.

objectivesTo assess the safety, benefits, and harms of different gases (e.g. carbon dioxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, nitrous oxide, and room air) used for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, four other databases, and three trials registers on 15 October 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants (irrespective of age, sex, or race) undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery under general anaesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN

resultsWe included 10 RCTs, randomising 583 participants, comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum: nitrous oxide (four trials), helium (five trials), or room air (one trial) was compared to carbon dioxide. All the RCTs were single-centre studies. Four RCTs were conducted in the USA; two in Australia; one in China; one in Finland; one in Iran; and one in the Netherlands. The mean age of the participants ranged from 27.6 years to 49.0 years. Four trials randomised participants to nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum (132 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (128 participants). None of the trials was at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on cardiopulmonary complications (Peto odds ratio (OR) 2.62, 95% CI 0.78 to 8.85; 3 studies, 204 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or surgical morbidity (Peto OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.31; 3 studies, 207 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no serious adverse events related to either nitrous oxide or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (4 studies, 260 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Four trials randomised participants to helium pneumoperitoneum (69 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (75 participants) and one trial involving 33 participants did not state the number of participants in each group. None of the trials was at low risk of bias. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of helium pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on cardiopulmonary complications (Peto OR 1.66, 95% CI 0.28 to 9.72; 3 studies, 128 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or surgical morbidity (5 studies, 177 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were three serious adverse events (subcutaneous emphysema) related to helium pneumoperitoneum (3 studies, 128 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One trial randomised participants to room air pneumoperitoneum (70 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (76 participants). The trial was at high risk of bias. There were no cardiopulmonary complications, serious adverse events, or deaths observed related to either room air or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum.    AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe evidence is very uncertain about the effects of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum compared to carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on any of the primary outcomes, including cardiopulmonary complications, surgical morbidity, and serious adverse events. The safety of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum has yet to be established, especially in people with high anaesthetic risk.

Indexed as

InsufflationLaparoscopyPneumoperitoneumAdultCarbon DioxideHeliumHumansNitrous OxideCarbon DioxideHeliumNitrous Oxide

Identifiers

PMID35288930
PMCPMC8921952
OpenAlexW4220708566

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.