↓ Skip to main content

Anesthesiologic Effects of Transperitoneal Versus Extraperitoneal Approach During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective Randomized Study

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Anesthesiologic Effects of Transperitoneal Versus Extraperitoneal Approach During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective Randomized Study
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, June 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2014.0199
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabrizio Dal Moro, Alessandro Crestani, Claudio Valotto, Andrea Guttilla, Rodolfo Soncin, Angelo Mangano, Filiberto Zattoni

Abstract

To compare the effects of CO2 insufflation on hemodynamics and oxygen levels and on acid-base level during Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) with transperitoneal (TP) versus extra-peritoneal (EP) accesses. Sixty-two patients were randomly assigned to TP (32) and EP (30) to RARP. Pre-operation data were collected for all patients. Hemodynamic, respiratory and blood acid-base parameters were measured at the moment of induction of anesthesia (T0), after starting CO2 insufflation (T1), and at 60 (T2) and 120 minutes (T3) after insufflation. In all cases, the abdominal pressure was set at 15 mmHg. Complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Student's two-t-test, with a significance level set at p<0.05, was used to compare categorical values between groups. The Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare the median values of two nonparametric continuous variables. The demographic characteristics of the patients in both groups were statistically comparable. Analysis of intra-operative anesthesiologic parameters showed that partial CO2 pressure during EP was significantly higher than during TP, with a consequent decrease in arterial pH. Other parameters analysed were similar in the two groups. Postoperative complications were comparable between groups. The most important limitations of this study were the small size of the patient groups and the impossibility of maintaining standard abdominal pressure throughout the operational phases, despite attempts to regulate it. This prospective randomized study demonstrates that, from the anesthesiologic viewpoint, during RARP the TP approach is preferable to EP, because of lower CO2 reabsorption and risk of acidosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 19%
Student > Master 9 14%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 38%
Psychology 6 9%
Computer Science 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 16 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2017.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#356
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,503
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 726 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.