Literature DB >> 25869025

The impact of two different inspiratory to expiratory ratios (1:1 and 1:2) on respiratory mechanics and oxygenation during volume-controlled ventilation in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Min-Soo Kim1, Na Young Kim, Ki-Young Lee, Young Deuk Choi, Jung Hwa Hong, Sun-Joon Bai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Volume-controlled ventilation with a prolonged inspiratory to expiratory ratio (I:E ratio) has been used to optimize gas exchange and respiratory mechanics in various surgical settings. We hypothesized that, when compared with an I:E ratio of 1:2, a prolonged I:E ratio of 1:1 would improve respiratory mechanics without reducing cardiac output (CO) during pneumoperitoneum and steep Trendelenburg positioning, both of which can impair respiratory function in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Furthermore, we evaluated its effect on oxygenation during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were randomly allocated to receive an I:E ratio of either 1:1 (group 1:1) or 1:2 (group 1:2). The primary endpoint, peak airway pressure (Ppeak), as well as hemodynamic data, including cardiac output (CO) and arterial oxygen tension (PaO2), were compared between groups at four time points: ten minutes after anesthesia induction (T1), 30 and 60 min after pneumoperitoneum with steep Trendelenburg positioning (T2 and T3), and ten minutes after supine positioning (T4). Overall comparisons were made between groups using linear mixed model analysis with post hoc testing of individual time points adjusted using a Bonferroni correction.
RESULTS: Linear mixed model analysis showed a significant overall difference in Ppeak between the two groups (P < 0.001). Post hoc analysis showed a significantly lower mean (SD) Ppeak in group 1:1 than in group 1:2 at T2 [28.4 (4.0) cm H2O vs 32.8 (5.2) cm H2O, respectively; mean difference, 4.3 cm H2O; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.3 to 6.4; P < 0.001] and T3 [27.8 (3.9) cm H2O vs 32.6 (5.0) cm H2O, respectively; mean difference, 4.7 cm H2O; 95% CI, 2.7 to 6.7; P < 0.001]. The CO assessed over these time points was comparable in both groups (P = 0.784). In addition, there were no significant differences in PaO2 between the two groups (P = 0.521).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with an I:E ratio of 1:2, a ratio of 1:1 lowered Ppeak without reducing CO during pneumoperitoneum and steep Trendelenburg positioning. Nevertheless, our results did not support its use solely for improving oxygenation. This trial was registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT01892449).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25869025     DOI: 10.1007/s12630-015-0383-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Anaesth        ISSN: 0832-610X            Impact factor:   5.063


  10 in total

1.  Effect of Equal Ratio Ventilation on Respiratory Mechanics and Oxygenation During Volume-Controlled Ventilation in Pediatric Patients.

Authors:  Ha Yeon Kim; Sung Yeon Ham; Eun Jung Kim; Hei Jin Yoon; Seung Yeon Choi; Bon Nyeo Koo
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.759

2.  Protective mechanical ventilation with optimal PEEP during RARP improves oxygenation and pulmonary indexes.

Authors:  Jianwei Zhou; Chuanguang Wang; Ran Lv; Na Liu; Yan Huang; Wu Wang; Lina Yu; Junran Xie
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 2.279

3.  Effects of recruitment manoeuvre on perioperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: A randomised single-blinded trial.

Authors:  Eun-Su Choi; Ah-Young Oh; Chi-Bum In; Jung-Hee Ryu; Young-Tae Jeon; Hyoung-Gyun Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-06       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Comparisons of Pressure-controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee and Volume-controlled 1:1 Equal Ratio Ventilation on Oxygenation and Respiratory Mechanics during Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: a Randomized-controlled Trial.

Authors:  Min-Soo Kim; Sarah Soh; So Yeon Kim; Min Sup Song; Jin Ha Park
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  Pressure-Controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee Compared to Volume-Controlled Ventilation with Equal Ratio in Obese Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Hysterectomy.

Authors:  Mona Gad; Khaled Gaballa; Ahmed Abdallah; Mohamed Abdelkhalek; Abdelhady Zayed; Hanan Nabil
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun

6.  Volume-Controlled Versus Dual-Controlled Ventilation during Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy with Steep Trendelenburg Position: A Randomized-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jin Ha Park; In Kyeong Park; Seung Ho Choi; Darhae Eum; Min-Soo Kim
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Equal Ratio Ventilation Reduces Blood Loss During Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery.

Authors:  Hye Bin Kim; Tae Dong Kweon; Chul Ho Chang; Ji Young Kim; Kyung Sub Kim; Ji Young Kim
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2021-08-15       Impact factor: 3.241

8.  Assessment of Perioperative Atelectasis Using Lung Ultrasonography in Patients Undergoing Pneumoperitoneum Surgery in the Trendelenburg Position: Aspects of Differences according to Ventilatory Mode.

Authors:  Youn Young Lee; Jong In Han; Bo Kyung Kang; Kyungah Jeong; Jong Wha Lee; Dong Yeon Kim
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 9.  Effect of the Prolonged Inspiratory to Expiratory Ratio on Oxygenation and Respiratory Mechanics During Surgical Procedures.

Authors:  Jin Ha Park; Jong Seok Lee; Jae Hoon Lee; Seokyung Shin; Nar Hyun Min; Min-Soo Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889

10.  Effects of ventilatory strategy on arterial oxygenation and respiratory mechanics in overweight and obese patients undergoing posterior spine surgery.

Authors:  Kyung Mi Kim; Jung Ju Choi; Dongchul Lee; Wol Seon Jung; Su Bin Kim; Hyun Jeong Kwak
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.