Heated CO<sub>2</sub>with or without humidification for minimally invasive abdominal surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative hypothermia during both open and laparoscopic abdominal surgery may be associated with adverse events. For laparoscopic abdominal surgery, the use of heated insufflation systems for establishing pneumoperitoneum has been described to prevent hypothermia. Humidification of the insufflated gas is also possible. Past studies have shown inconclusive results with regards to maintenance of core temperature and reduction of postoperative pain and recovery times. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of heated gas insufflation on patient outcomes following minimally invasive abdominal surgery. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), Web of Science, Scopus, www.clinicaltrials.gov and the National Research Register were searched (1956 to 14 June 2010). Grey literature and cross-references were also searched. Searches were limited to human studies without language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: All included studies were randomized trials comparing heated (with or without humidification) gas insufflation with cold gas insufflation in adult and pediatric populations undergoing minimally invasive abdominal procedures. Study quality was assessed in regards to relevance, design, sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, possibility of incomplete data and selective reporting. The selection of studies for the review was done independently by two authors, with any disagreement resolved in consensus with a third co-author. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Screening of eligible studies, data extraction and methodological quality assessment of the trials were performed by the authors. Data from eligible studies were collected using data sheets. Results were presented using mean differences for continuous outcomes and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes. The estimated effects were calculated using the latest version of RevMan software. Publication bias was taken into consideration and funnel plots were compiled. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included in the analysis. During laparoscopic abdominal surgery, no effect on postoperative pain nor changes in core temperature, morphine consumption, length of hospitalisation, lens fogging, length of operation or recovery room stay were associated with heated compared to cold gas insufflation with or without humidification. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The study offers evidence that during laparoscopic abdominal surgery, heated gas insufflation, with or without humidification, has minimal benefit on patient outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".