Literature DB >> 14693633

Mechanical versus manual ventilation via a face mask during the induction of anesthesia: a prospective, randomized, crossover study.

Achim von Goedecke1, Wolfgang G Voelckel, Volker Wenzel, Christoph Hörmann, Horst G Wagner-Berger, Volker Dörges, Karl H Lindner, Christian Keller.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: One approach to make ventilation safer in an unprotected airway has been to limit tidal volumes; another one might be to limit peak airway pressure, although it is unknown whether adequate tidal volumes can be delivered. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of automatic pressure-controlled ventilation versus manual circle system face-mask ventilation regarding ventilatory variables in an unprotected airway. We studied 41 adults (ASA status I-II) in a prospective, randomized, crossover design with both devices during the induction of anesthesia. Respiratory variables were measured with a pulmonary monitor (CP-100). Pressure-controlled mask ventilation versus circle system ventilation resulted in lower (mean +/- SD) peak airway pressures (10.6 +/- 1.5 cm H(2)O versus 14.4 +/- 2.4 cm H(2)O; P < 0.001), delta airway pressures (8.5 +/- 1.5 cm H(2)O versus 11.9 +/- 2.3 cm H(2)O; P < 0.001), expiratory tidal volume (650 +/- 100 mL versus 680 +/- 100 mL; P = 0.001), minute ventilation (10.4 +/- 1.8 L/min versus 11.6 +/- 1.8 L/min; P < 0.001), and peak inspiratory flow rates (0.81 +/- 0.06 L/s versus 1.06 +/- 0.26 L/s; P < 0.001) but higher inspiratory time fraction (48% +/- 0.8% versus 33% +/- 7.7%; P < 0.001) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (34 +/- 3 mm Hg versus 33 +/- 4 mm Hg; not significant). We conclude that in this model of apneic patients with an unprotected airway, pressure-controlled ventilation resulted in reduced inspiratory peak flow rates and peak airway pressures when compared with circle system ventilation, thus providing an additional patient safety effect during mask ventilation. IMPLICATIONS: In this model of apneic patients with an unprotected airway, pressure-controlled ventilation resulted in reduced inspiratory peak flow rates and lower peak airway pressures when compared with circle system ventilation, thus providing an additional patient safety effect during face-mask ventilation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14693633     DOI: 10.1213/01.ane.0000096190.36875.67

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  12 in total

1.  ["Above too please"! Artificial respiration during cardiopulmonary resuscitation].

Authors:  A von Goedecke; V Wenzel
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  [Decreased inspiratory time during ventilation of an unprotected airway. Effect on stomach inflation and lung ventilation in a bench model].

Authors:  A von Goedecke; K Bowden; C Keller; W G Voelckel; H-C Jeske; V Wenzel
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Linear model and algorithm to automatically estimate the pressure limit of pressure controlled ventilation for delivering a target tidal volume.

Authors:  Felice Eugenio Agrò; Paolo Cappa; Salvatore Andrea Sciuto; Sergio Silvestri
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2006-03-06       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  Peak airway pressure is lower during pressure-controlled than during manual facemask ventilation for induction of anesthesia in pediatric patients-a randomized, clinical crossover trial.

Authors:  Ulrich Goebel; Stefan Schumann; Steffen Wirth
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 5.  [Mask ventilation as an exit strategy of endotracheal intubation].

Authors:  A von Goedecke; C Keller; W G Voelckel; M Dünser; P Paal; C Torgersen; V Wenzel
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 6.  [Induction of anaesthesia and intubation in children with a full stomach. Time to rethink!].

Authors:  M Weiss; A C Gerber
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.041

7.  [Ultrasound assessment of gastric insufflation in obese patients receiving transnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilatory exchange during general anesthesia induction].

Authors:  Weiqing Jiang; Li Shi; Qian Zhao; Wenwen Zhang; Man Xu; Wanling Wang; Xiaoliang Wang; Hongguang Bao; Jing Leng; Li Jiang
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2020-11-30

Review 8.  Clinical review: management of difficult airways.

Authors:  Olivier Langeron; Julien Amour; Benoît Vivien; Frédéric Aubrun
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults.

Authors:  C Frerk; V S Mitchell; A F McNarry; C Mendonca; R Bhagrath; A Patel; E P O'Sullivan; N M Woodall; I Ahmad
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2015-11-10       Impact factor: 9.166

10.  Determination of the optimal inspiratory pressure providing adequate ventilation while minimizing gastric insufflation using real-time ultrasonography in Chinese children: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study.

Authors:  Xiaowei Qian; Qiong Hu; Hang Zhao; Bo Meng; Yang Nan; Hong Cao; Qingquan Lian; Jun Li
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 2.217

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.