OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The outcome of functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) depends on a clean surgical field achieved by minimizing intraoperative bleeding. High frequency jet ventilation (HFJV), due to lower airway pressures, offers the benefit of improved venous return, less bleeding, and improved operating conditions. HFJV was compared to intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) by assessment of surgical conditions and measurement of intraoperative blood loss. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind study. METHODS: A total of 22 patients undergoing FESS were randomly assigned to be ventilated during surgery under general anesthesia by either HFJV or IPPV. The quality of the surgical field was assessed and the total blood loss was measured. RESULTS: The mean airway pressure was significantly lower in the HFJV group than in the IPPV group (2.42 +/- 1.17 and 7.11 +/- 0.72, respectively, P < .0001). The total mean loss of blood in the HFJV group was 170 cc and in the IPPV group was 318.18 cc (P = .017). The quality of the surgical field as estimated by the surgeon was significantly better in the HFJV group. The mean point values on the Boezaart et al. scale for the IPPV and HFJV groups were 2.72 +/- 0.77 and 1.80 +/- 0.686, respectively (P = .012). CONCLUSIONS:HFJV significantly reduced the amount of intraoperative bleeding and thus significantly improved the quality of the surgical field. It is suggested that increased venous return due to lower intrathoracic pressures resulted in less bleeding and improved operating conditions. HFJV can be effectively used for FESS in order to improve endoscopic view with no adverse effects.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The outcome of functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) depends on a clean surgical field achieved by minimizing intraoperative bleeding. High frequency jet ventilation (HFJV), due to lower airway pressures, offers the benefit of improved venous return, less bleeding, and improved operating conditions. HFJV was compared to intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) by assessment of surgical conditions and measurement of intraoperative blood loss. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind study. METHODS: A total of 22 patients undergoing FESS were randomly assigned to be ventilated during surgery under general anesthesia by either HFJV or IPPV. The quality of the surgical field was assessed and the total blood loss was measured. RESULTS: The mean airway pressure was significantly lower in the HFJV group than in the IPPV group (2.42 +/- 1.17 and 7.11 +/- 0.72, respectively, P < .0001). The total mean loss of blood in the HFJV group was 170 cc and in the IPPV group was 318.18 cc (P = .017). The quality of the surgical field as estimated by the surgeon was significantly better in the HFJV group. The mean point values on the Boezaart et al. scale for the IPPV and HFJV groups were 2.72 +/- 0.77 and 1.80 +/- 0.686, respectively (P = .012). CONCLUSIONS: HFJV significantly reduced the amount of intraoperative bleeding and thus significantly improved the quality of the surgical field. It is suggested that increased venous return due to lower intrathoracic pressures resulted in less bleeding and improved operating conditions. HFJV can be effectively used for FESS in order to improve endoscopic view with no adverse effects.
Authors: Elizabeth A Kelly; Suneeta Gollapudy; Matthias L Riess; Harvey J Woehlck; Todd A Loehrl; David M Poetker Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Morgan Le Guen; Alexis Paternot; Agnes Declerck; Elodie Feliot; Etienne Gayat; Stephan Gaillard; Marc Fischler Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 1.817