Technical Performance of Continuous Pressure Insufflators Versus Traditional Insufflators in the Presence of Leaks During Laparoscopic Surgery.

Background. New insufflators have been developed to manage leaks emanating from the working cavity during laparoscopic surgery. Little data have been published to show the performance of these insufflators. This study evaluates the performance of 2 modern continuous pressure insufflators in various leak conditions. Methods. Performance of a new continuous pressure insufflator, EVA15 (Palliare, Galway, Ireland), was compared with that of a continuous pressure insufflator, Airseal intelligent Flow System (iFS) (CONMED, Utica, NY), and a traditional intermittent pressure insufflator, Endoflator 40 (KARL STORZ, Tuttlingen, Germany). Six different leak scenarios were created in a swine model to create different dynamic leak profiles of between 5 and 15 L/min. Pressure deviation from setting was measured for each insufflator tested. The following were calculated: (a) mean absolute difference of measured insufflation pressure vs. the insufflator pressure setting for the 50 second measurement period (MAD) and (b) standard deviation of the absolute differences (SD). Results. The average mean absolute pressure difference between the EVA15 and Airseal is .27 mmHg. However, the average mean absolute pressure difference between the EVA15 and Endoflator 40 is 2.62 mmHg. Conclusions. Continuous pressure insufflators provide superior pressure delivery performance in leak situations when compared against a traditional intermittent pressure insufflator. No clinically significant performance difference was observed when comparing the EVA15 and Airseal iFS insufflators in the tested leak situations.