Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Abstract Background It remains uncertain whether individualization of pneumoperitoneum pressures during laparoscopic surgery improves postoperative recovery. This study compared an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy with a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure (SPP) strategy with r...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of surgery 2020-11, Vol.107 (12), p.1605-1614
Hauptverfasser: Díaz-Cambronero, O, Mazzinari, G, Flor Lorente, B, García Gregorio, N, Robles-Hernandez, D, Olmedilla Arnal, L E, Martin de Pablos, A, Schultz, M J, Errando, C L, Argente Navarro, M P
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1614
container_issue 12
container_start_page 1605
container_title British journal of surgery
container_volume 107
creator Díaz-Cambronero, O
Mazzinari, G
Flor Lorente, B
García Gregorio, N
Robles-Hernandez, D
Olmedilla Arnal, L E
Martin de Pablos, A
Schultz, M J
Errando, C L
Argente Navarro, M P
description Abstract Background It remains uncertain whether individualization of pneumoperitoneum pressures during laparoscopic surgery improves postoperative recovery. This study compared an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy with a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure (SPP) strategy with respect to postoperative recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods This was a multicentre RCT. The IPP strategy comprised modified patient positioning, deep neuromuscular blockade, and abdominal wall prestretching targeting the lowest intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) that maintained acceptable workspace. The SPP strategy comprised patient positioning according to the surgeon's preference, moderate neuromuscular blockade and a fixed IAP of 12 mmHg. The primary endpoint was physiological postoperative recovery, assessed by means of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale. Secondary endpoints included recovery in other domains and overall recovery, the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and plasma markers of inflammation up to postoperative day 3. Results Of 166 patients, 85 received an IPP strategy and 81 an SPP strategy. The IPP strategy was associated with a higher probability of physiological recovery (odds ratio (OR) 2·77, 95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 6·40, P = 0·017; risk ratio (RR) 1·82, 1·79 to 1·87, P = 0·049). The IPP strategy was also associated with a higher probability of emotional (P = 0·013) and overall (P = 0·011) recovery. Intraoperative adverse events were less frequent with the IPP strategy (P < 0·001) and the plasma neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio was lower (P = 0·029). Other endpoints were not affected. Conclusion In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an IPP strategy was associated with faster recovery, fewer intraoperative complications and less inflammation than an SPP strategy. Registration number: NCT02773173 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Graphical Abstract In patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy, targeting a lower intra-abdominal pressure, was associated with faster recovery and fewer intraoperative complications than a standard strategy. An IPP strategy aiming at the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure and preserving optimal surgical condition was associated with less intraoperative coughing and movement, and less inflammation. Graphical Abstract Pressure matters
doi_str_mv 10.1002/bjs.11736
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2410730359</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1002/bjs.11736</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2410730359</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3486-9396196a45de35d598f4e5640ab8e752f735d9a528cf377f6d9687bb7af93a0f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9vFCEYh4nR2HX14BcwJHroZVoYBpjxVpv6p2nSg3qeMPDSsJkZEJg16yfqxyy7W3sw8QJveJ_fE5IfQm8pOaOE1OfDJp1RKpl4hlaUCV7VVLTP0YoQIivKanaCXqW0IYQywuuX6ITVnIimpSt0f2Ut6Iy9xWrGbjZu68yiRvcHDN5CTEvCKavZqGhwmGGZfIDost-POERIaYlQkKgy3O2wn3HwKe8hld0WcATti2f3ESsci8dPB7Ue3ey0GnGOrpxuxqMKKvqkfXAaaz_6ksxlVfx3Jf8avbBqTPDm8V6jn5-vflx-rW5uv3y7vLipNGtaUXWsE7QTquEGGDe8a20DXDREDS1IXltZXjvF61ZbJqUVphOtHAapbMcUsWyNTo_eEP2vBVLuJ5c0jKOawS-prxtKJCOMdwV9_w-68Uucy-8KxYmkXVtKWaN3j9QyTGD6EN2k4q7_20EBzo_AbzfC7mlPSb8vty_l9ody-0_X3w9DSXw4JvwS_s-zB7xGpn0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2450719817</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Díaz-Cambronero, O ; Mazzinari, G ; Flor Lorente, B ; García Gregorio, N ; Robles-Hernandez, D ; Olmedilla Arnal, L E ; Martin de Pablos, A ; Schultz, M J ; Errando, C L ; Argente Navarro, M P</creator><creatorcontrib>Díaz-Cambronero, O ; Mazzinari, G ; Flor Lorente, B ; García Gregorio, N ; Robles-Hernandez, D ; Olmedilla Arnal, L E ; Martin de Pablos, A ; Schultz, M J ; Errando, C L ; Argente Navarro, M P ; IPPColLapSe II study investigators</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background It remains uncertain whether individualization of pneumoperitoneum pressures during laparoscopic surgery improves postoperative recovery. This study compared an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy with a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure (SPP) strategy with respect to postoperative recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods This was a multicentre RCT. The IPP strategy comprised modified patient positioning, deep neuromuscular blockade, and abdominal wall prestretching targeting the lowest intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) that maintained acceptable workspace. The SPP strategy comprised patient positioning according to the surgeon's preference, moderate neuromuscular blockade and a fixed IAP of 12 mmHg. The primary endpoint was physiological postoperative recovery, assessed by means of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale. Secondary endpoints included recovery in other domains and overall recovery, the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and plasma markers of inflammation up to postoperative day 3. Results Of 166 patients, 85 received an IPP strategy and 81 an SPP strategy. The IPP strategy was associated with a higher probability of physiological recovery (odds ratio (OR) 2·77, 95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 6·40, P = 0·017; risk ratio (RR) 1·82, 1·79 to 1·87, P = 0·049). The IPP strategy was also associated with a higher probability of emotional (P = 0·013) and overall (P = 0·011) recovery. Intraoperative adverse events were less frequent with the IPP strategy (P &lt; 0·001) and the plasma neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio was lower (P = 0·029). Other endpoints were not affected. Conclusion In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an IPP strategy was associated with faster recovery, fewer intraoperative complications and less inflammation than an SPP strategy. Registration number: NCT02773173 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Graphical Abstract In patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy, targeting a lower intra-abdominal pressure, was associated with faster recovery and fewer intraoperative complications than a standard strategy. An IPP strategy aiming at the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure and preserving optimal surgical condition was associated with less intraoperative coughing and movement, and less inflammation. Graphical Abstract Pressure matters</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1323</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2168</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11736</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32506481</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Aged ; Colon - surgery ; Colorectal surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Laparoscopy - adverse effects ; Laparoscopy - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient positioning ; Physiology ; Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial - methods ; Postoperative Care - methods ; Postoperative period ; Precision Medicine - methods ; Rectum - surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>British journal of surgery, 2020-11, Vol.107 (12), p.1605-1614</ispartof><rights>2020 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd 2020</rights><rights>2020 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 BJS Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3486-9396196a45de35d598f4e5640ab8e752f735d9a528cf377f6d9687bb7af93a0f3</citedby><orcidid>0000-0001-8882-081X ; 0000-0002-3170-7709</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fbjs.11736$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fbjs.11736$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1414,27911,27912,45561,45562</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32506481$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Díaz-Cambronero, O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazzinari, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flor Lorente, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García Gregorio, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robles-Hernandez, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olmedilla Arnal, L E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin de Pablos, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schultz, M J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Errando, C L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Argente Navarro, M P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IPPColLapSe II study investigators</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery</title><title>British journal of surgery</title><addtitle>Br J Surg</addtitle><description>Abstract Background It remains uncertain whether individualization of pneumoperitoneum pressures during laparoscopic surgery improves postoperative recovery. This study compared an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy with a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure (SPP) strategy with respect to postoperative recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods This was a multicentre RCT. The IPP strategy comprised modified patient positioning, deep neuromuscular blockade, and abdominal wall prestretching targeting the lowest intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) that maintained acceptable workspace. The SPP strategy comprised patient positioning according to the surgeon's preference, moderate neuromuscular blockade and a fixed IAP of 12 mmHg. The primary endpoint was physiological postoperative recovery, assessed by means of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale. Secondary endpoints included recovery in other domains and overall recovery, the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and plasma markers of inflammation up to postoperative day 3. Results Of 166 patients, 85 received an IPP strategy and 81 an SPP strategy. The IPP strategy was associated with a higher probability of physiological recovery (odds ratio (OR) 2·77, 95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 6·40, P = 0·017; risk ratio (RR) 1·82, 1·79 to 1·87, P = 0·049). The IPP strategy was also associated with a higher probability of emotional (P = 0·013) and overall (P = 0·011) recovery. Intraoperative adverse events were less frequent with the IPP strategy (P &lt; 0·001) and the plasma neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio was lower (P = 0·029). Other endpoints were not affected. Conclusion In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an IPP strategy was associated with faster recovery, fewer intraoperative complications and less inflammation than an SPP strategy. Registration number: NCT02773173 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Graphical Abstract In patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy, targeting a lower intra-abdominal pressure, was associated with faster recovery and fewer intraoperative complications than a standard strategy. An IPP strategy aiming at the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure and preserving optimal surgical condition was associated with less intraoperative coughing and movement, and less inflammation. Graphical Abstract Pressure matters</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Colon - surgery</subject><subject>Colorectal surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient positioning</subject><subject>Physiology</subject><subject>Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial - methods</subject><subject>Postoperative Care - methods</subject><subject>Postoperative period</subject><subject>Precision Medicine - methods</subject><subject>Rectum - surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0007-1323</issn><issn>1365-2168</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9vFCEYh4nR2HX14BcwJHroZVoYBpjxVpv6p2nSg3qeMPDSsJkZEJg16yfqxyy7W3sw8QJveJ_fE5IfQm8pOaOE1OfDJp1RKpl4hlaUCV7VVLTP0YoQIivKanaCXqW0IYQywuuX6ITVnIimpSt0f2Ut6Iy9xWrGbjZu68yiRvcHDN5CTEvCKavZqGhwmGGZfIDost-POERIaYlQkKgy3O2wn3HwKe8hld0WcATti2f3ESsci8dPB7Ue3ey0GnGOrpxuxqMKKvqkfXAaaz_6ksxlVfx3Jf8avbBqTPDm8V6jn5-vflx-rW5uv3y7vLipNGtaUXWsE7QTquEGGDe8a20DXDREDS1IXltZXjvF61ZbJqUVphOtHAapbMcUsWyNTo_eEP2vBVLuJ5c0jKOawS-prxtKJCOMdwV9_w-68Uucy-8KxYmkXVtKWaN3j9QyTGD6EN2k4q7_20EBzo_AbzfC7mlPSb8vty_l9ody-0_X3w9DSXw4JvwS_s-zB7xGpn0</recordid><startdate>202011</startdate><enddate>202011</enddate><creator>Díaz-Cambronero, O</creator><creator>Mazzinari, G</creator><creator>Flor Lorente, B</creator><creator>García Gregorio, N</creator><creator>Robles-Hernandez, D</creator><creator>Olmedilla Arnal, L E</creator><creator>Martin de Pablos, A</creator><creator>Schultz, M J</creator><creator>Errando, C L</creator><creator>Argente Navarro, M P</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8882-081X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3170-7709</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202011</creationdate><title>Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery</title><author>Díaz-Cambronero, O ; Mazzinari, G ; Flor Lorente, B ; García Gregorio, N ; Robles-Hernandez, D ; Olmedilla Arnal, L E ; Martin de Pablos, A ; Schultz, M J ; Errando, C L ; Argente Navarro, M P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3486-9396196a45de35d598f4e5640ab8e752f735d9a528cf377f6d9687bb7af93a0f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Colon - surgery</topic><topic>Colorectal surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient positioning</topic><topic>Physiology</topic><topic>Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial - methods</topic><topic>Postoperative Care - methods</topic><topic>Postoperative period</topic><topic>Precision Medicine - methods</topic><topic>Rectum - surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Díaz-Cambronero, O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mazzinari, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flor Lorente, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García Gregorio, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Robles-Hernandez, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olmedilla Arnal, L E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin de Pablos, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schultz, M J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Errando, C L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Argente Navarro, M P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IPPColLapSe II study investigators</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Díaz-Cambronero, O</au><au>Mazzinari, G</au><au>Flor Lorente, B</au><au>García Gregorio, N</au><au>Robles-Hernandez, D</au><au>Olmedilla Arnal, L E</au><au>Martin de Pablos, A</au><au>Schultz, M J</au><au>Errando, C L</au><au>Argente Navarro, M P</au><aucorp>IPPColLapSe II study investigators</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery</atitle><jtitle>British journal of surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Surg</addtitle><date>2020-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>107</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1605</spage><epage>1614</epage><pages>1605-1614</pages><issn>0007-1323</issn><eissn>1365-2168</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background It remains uncertain whether individualization of pneumoperitoneum pressures during laparoscopic surgery improves postoperative recovery. This study compared an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy with a standard pneumoperitoneum pressure (SPP) strategy with respect to postoperative recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods This was a multicentre RCT. The IPP strategy comprised modified patient positioning, deep neuromuscular blockade, and abdominal wall prestretching targeting the lowest intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) that maintained acceptable workspace. The SPP strategy comprised patient positioning according to the surgeon's preference, moderate neuromuscular blockade and a fixed IAP of 12 mmHg. The primary endpoint was physiological postoperative recovery, assessed by means of the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale. Secondary endpoints included recovery in other domains and overall recovery, the occurrence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and plasma markers of inflammation up to postoperative day 3. Results Of 166 patients, 85 received an IPP strategy and 81 an SPP strategy. The IPP strategy was associated with a higher probability of physiological recovery (odds ratio (OR) 2·77, 95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 6·40, P = 0·017; risk ratio (RR) 1·82, 1·79 to 1·87, P = 0·049). The IPP strategy was also associated with a higher probability of emotional (P = 0·013) and overall (P = 0·011) recovery. Intraoperative adverse events were less frequent with the IPP strategy (P &lt; 0·001) and the plasma neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio was lower (P = 0·029). Other endpoints were not affected. Conclusion In this cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an IPP strategy was associated with faster recovery, fewer intraoperative complications and less inflammation than an SPP strategy. Registration number: NCT02773173 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Graphical Abstract In patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery, an individualized pneumoperitoneum pressure (IPP) strategy, targeting a lower intra-abdominal pressure, was associated with faster recovery and fewer intraoperative complications than a standard strategy. An IPP strategy aiming at the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure and preserving optimal surgical condition was associated with less intraoperative coughing and movement, and less inflammation. Graphical Abstract Pressure matters</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>32506481</pmid><doi>10.1002/bjs.11736</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8882-081X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3170-7709</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-1323
ispartof British journal of surgery, 2020-11, Vol.107 (12), p.1605-1614
issn 0007-1323
1365-2168
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2410730359
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
subjects Abdomen
Aged
Colon - surgery
Colorectal surgery
Female
Humans
Laparoscopy
Laparoscopy - adverse effects
Laparoscopy - methods
Male
Middle Aged
Patient positioning
Physiology
Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial - methods
Postoperative Care - methods
Postoperative period
Precision Medicine - methods
Rectum - surgery
Treatment Outcome
title Effect of an individualized versus standard pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy on postoperative recovery: a randomized clinical trial in laparoscopic colorectal surgery
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T13%3A26%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20an%20individualized%20versus%20standard%20pneumoperitoneum%20pressure%20strategy%20on%20postoperative%20recovery:%20a%20randomized%20clinical%20trial%20in%20laparoscopic%20colorectal%20surgery&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=D%C3%ADaz-Cambronero,%20O&rft.aucorp=IPPColLapSe%20II%20study%20investigators&rft.date=2020-11&rft.volume=107&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1605&rft.epage=1614&rft.pages=1605-1614&rft.issn=0007-1323&rft.eissn=1365-2168&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/bjs.11736&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2410730359%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2450719817&rft_id=info:pmid/32506481&rft_oup_id=10.1002/bjs.11736&rfr_iscdi=true