Cargando…

Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: AirSeal™ is a novel class of valve-free insufflation system that enables a stable pneumoperitoneum with continuous smoke evacuation and carbon dioxide (CO(2)) recirculation during laparoscopic surgery. Comparison data to standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflators is scarce. Th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia, Knauer, Michael, Köhler, Gernot, Koch, Oliver Owen, Strasser, Klaus, Egger, Margot, Emmanuel, Klaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24950720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-239
_version_ 1782323724354060288
author Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia
Knauer, Michael
Köhler, Gernot
Koch, Oliver Owen
Strasser, Klaus
Egger, Margot
Emmanuel, Klaus
author_facet Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia
Knauer, Michael
Köhler, Gernot
Koch, Oliver Owen
Strasser, Klaus
Egger, Margot
Emmanuel, Klaus
author_sort Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: AirSeal™ is a novel class of valve-free insufflation system that enables a stable pneumoperitoneum with continuous smoke evacuation and carbon dioxide (CO(2)) recirculation during laparoscopic surgery. Comparison data to standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflators is scarce. The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential advantages of AirSeal™ compared to a standard CO(2) insufflator. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a single center randomized controlled trial comparing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, colorectal surgery and hernia repair with AirSeal™ (group A) versus a standard CO(2) pressure insufflator (group S). Patients are randomized using a web-based central randomization and registration system. Primary outcome measures will be operative time and level of postoperative shoulder pain by using the visual analog score (VAS). Secondary outcomes include the evaluation of immunological values through blood tests, anesthesiological parameters, surgical side effects and length of hospital stay. Taking into account an expected dropout rate of 5%, the total number of patients is 182 (n = 91 per group). All tests will be two-sided with a confidence level of 95% (P <0.05). DISCUSSION: The duration of an operation is an important factor in reducing the patient’s exposure to CO(2) pneumoperitoneum and its adverse consequences. This trial will help to evaluate if the announced advantages of AirSeal™, such as clear sight of the operative site and an exceptionally stable working environment, will facilitate the course of selected procedures and influence operation time and patients clinical outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01740011, registered 23 November 2012.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4078359
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40783592014-07-07 Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia Knauer, Michael Köhler, Gernot Koch, Oliver Owen Strasser, Klaus Egger, Margot Emmanuel, Klaus Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: AirSeal™ is a novel class of valve-free insufflation system that enables a stable pneumoperitoneum with continuous smoke evacuation and carbon dioxide (CO(2)) recirculation during laparoscopic surgery. Comparison data to standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflators is scarce. The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential advantages of AirSeal™ compared to a standard CO(2) insufflator. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a single center randomized controlled trial comparing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, colorectal surgery and hernia repair with AirSeal™ (group A) versus a standard CO(2) pressure insufflator (group S). Patients are randomized using a web-based central randomization and registration system. Primary outcome measures will be operative time and level of postoperative shoulder pain by using the visual analog score (VAS). Secondary outcomes include the evaluation of immunological values through blood tests, anesthesiological parameters, surgical side effects and length of hospital stay. Taking into account an expected dropout rate of 5%, the total number of patients is 182 (n = 91 per group). All tests will be two-sided with a confidence level of 95% (P <0.05). DISCUSSION: The duration of an operation is an important factor in reducing the patient’s exposure to CO(2) pneumoperitoneum and its adverse consequences. This trial will help to evaluate if the announced advantages of AirSeal™, such as clear sight of the operative site and an exceptionally stable working environment, will facilitate the course of selected procedures and influence operation time and patients clinical outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01740011, registered 23 November 2012. BioMed Central 2014-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4078359/ /pubmed/24950720 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-239 Text en Copyright © 2014 Luketina et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Luketina, Ruzica Rosalia
Knauer, Michael
Köhler, Gernot
Koch, Oliver Owen
Strasser, Klaus
Egger, Margot
Emmanuel, Klaus
Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title_full Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title_short Comparison of a standard CO(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus AirSeal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparison of a standard co(2) pressure pneumoperitoneum insufflator versus airseal™: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24950720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-239
work_keys_str_mv AT luketinaruzicarosalia comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT knauermichael comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kohlergernot comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kocholiverowen comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT strasserklaus comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT eggermargot comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT emmanuelklaus comparisonofastandardco2pressurepneumoperitoneuminsufflatorversusairsealstudyprotocolofarandomizedcontrolledtrial