Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
Comparison of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure versus Tidal Volume-Induced Ventilator-Driven Alveolar Recruitment Maneuver in Robotic Prostatectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jung Kangha, Kim Sojin, Kim Byung Jun, Park MiHye
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the pulmonary effects of two ventilator-driven alveolar recruitment maneuver (ARM) methods during laparoscopic surgery.
METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing robotic prostatectomy were randomized into two groups: incrementally increasing positive end-expiratory pressure in a stepwise manner (PEEP group) versus tidal volume (VT group). We performed each ARM after induction of anesthesia in the supine position (T1), after pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position (T2), and after peritoneum desufflation in the supine position (T3). The primary outcome was change in end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) before and 5 min after ARM at T3, measured by electrical impedance tomography.
RESULTS: The PEEP group showed significantly higher increasing EELI 5 min after ARM than the VT group at T1 and T3 (median [IQR] 460 [180,800] vs. 200 [80,315], p = 0.002 and 280 [170,420] vs. 95 [55,175], p = 0.004, respectively; PEEP group vs. VT group). The PEEP group showed significantly higher lung compliance and lower driving pressure at T1 and T3. However, there was no significant difference in EELI change, lung compliance, or driving pressure after ARM at T2.
CONCLUSIONS: The ventilator-driven ARM by the increasing PEEP method led to greater improvements in lung compliance at the end of laparoscopic surgery than the increasing VT method.
METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing robotic prostatectomy were randomized into two groups: incrementally increasing positive end-expiratory pressure in a stepwise manner (PEEP group) versus tidal volume (VT group). We performed each ARM after induction of anesthesia in the supine position (T1), after pneumoperitoneum in the Trendelenburg position (T2), and after peritoneum desufflation in the supine position (T3). The primary outcome was change in end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) before and 5 min after ARM at T3, measured by electrical impedance tomography.
RESULTS: The PEEP group showed significantly higher increasing EELI 5 min after ARM than the VT group at T1 and T3 (median [IQR] 460 [180,800] vs. 200 [80,315], p = 0.002 and 280 [170,420] vs. 95 [55,175], p = 0.004, respectively; PEEP group vs. VT group). The PEEP group showed significantly higher lung compliance and lower driving pressure at T1 and T3. However, there was no significant difference in EELI change, lung compliance, or driving pressure after ARM at T2.
CONCLUSIONS: The ventilator-driven ARM by the increasing PEEP method led to greater improvements in lung compliance at the end of laparoscopic surgery than the increasing VT method.