Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg.  2019 May;23(2):163-167. 10.14701/ahbps.2019.23.2.163.

Laparoscopic surgery: It is no necessary to change ventilator mode to improve ventilation conditions; a controlled trial

• Mounir K
• Lamkinsi T
• Hamzaoui H
• Issa S
• Bensghir M
• Laalaoui S

• KMID: 2448770
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.14701/ahbps.2019.23.2.163

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS
The main objective of this study is to compare the ventilatory effects of AFVC and PC modes with the VC mode in laparoscopic surgery of the gall bladder.
METHODS
Thirty-five patients programmed for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. Four times were defined for all patients. The parameters studied were recorded ten minutes after anesthetic induction; and this is the time T1. The time T2 fits to 10 min after induction of pneumoperitoneum. Then, the ventilator mode was changed from VC mode to AFVC mode. Ten minutes later, the variables were scored; it was the time T3. The ventilator mode was then changed to a PC mode. The set pressure was adjusted in order to obtain the same Vt as at the time T2. The time T4 was 10 minutes after switching to PC mode.
RESULTS
The Vte were increased, compared to time T2, during the AFVC and PC modes. The induction of pneumoperitoneum with CO2 induced a rise of PETCO2 between T1 and T2. These had been accompanied by a significant rise in airway pressures. The change from VC mode to AFVC mode resulted in lower Prpeak and Prtray elevation without impacting dynamic compliance.
CONCLUSIONS
AFVC mode appears safe for patients in laparoscopic surgery. Its use, compared with VC, is associated with a decrease in Prpeak without effects on the Cdyn, oxygenation, capnia and hemodynamic parameters. We conclude that is no necessary to change ventlatory modes to improve ventilation conditions in non-obese patients.

Keyword

Pneumoperitoneum; Laparoscopy; Ventilation mode; Dynamic compliance

MeSH Terms

Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic
Compliance
Hemodynamics
Humans
Laparoscopy*
Oxygen
Pneumoperitoneum
Urinary Bladder
Ventilation*
Ventilators, Mechanical*
Oxygen

Reference

1. Sharma KC, Brandstetter RD, Brensilver JM, Jung LD. Cardiopulmonary physiology and pathophysiology as a consequence of laparoscopic surgery. Chest. 1996; 110:810–815.

2. Balick-Weber CC, Nicolas P, Hedreville-Montout M, Blanchet P, Stéphan F. Respiratory and haemodynamic effects of volume-controlled vs pressure-controlled ventilation during laparoscopy: a cross-over study with echocardiographic assessment. Br J Anaesth. 2007; 99:429–435.

3. Branson RD, Davis K Jr. Dual control modes: combining volume and pressure breaths. Respir Care Clin N Am. 2001; 7:397–408. viii

4. Campbell RS, Davis BR. Pressure-controlled versus volume-controlled ventilation: does it matter? Respir Care. 2002; 47:416–424. discussion 424–426.

5. Lasocki S, Labat F, Plantefeve G, Desmard M, Mentec H. A long-term clinical evaluation of autoflow during assist-controlled ventilation: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2010; 111:915–921.

6. Feinstein R, Ghouri A. Changes in pulmonary mechanics during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Anesth Analg. 1993; 76:S102.

7. Oikkonen M, Tallgren M. Changes in respiratory compliance at laparoscopy: measurements using side stream spirometry. Can J Anaesth. 1995; 42:495–497.

8. Tuğrul M, Camci E, Karadeniz H, Sentürk M, Pembeci K, Akpir K. Comparison of volume controlled with pressure controlled ventilation during one-lung anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 1997; 79:306–310.

9. Nadu A, Ekstein P, Szold A, Friedman A, Nakache R, Cohen Y, et al. Ventilatory and hemodynamic changes during retroperitoneal and transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy: a prospective real-time comparison. J Urol. 2005; 174:1013–1017.

10. Sen O, Umutoglu T, Aydın N, Toptas M, Tutuncu AC, Bakan M. Effects of pressure-controlled and volume-controlled ventilation on respiratory mechanics and systemic stress response during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Springerplus. 2016; 5:298.

11. Lessard MR, Guérot E, Lorino H, Lemaire F, Brochard L. Effects of pressure-controlled with different I:E ratios versus volume-controlled ventilation on respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, and hemodynamics in patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome. Anesthesiology. 1994; 80:983–991.

12. Davis K Jr, Branson RD, Campbell RS, Porembka DT. Comparison of volume control and pressure control ventilation: is flow waveform the difference? J Trauma. 1996; 41:808–814.

13. Prella M, Feihl F, Domenighetti G. Effects of short-term pressure-controlled ventilation on gas exchange, airway pressures, and gas distribution in patients with acute lung injury/ARDS: comparison with volume-controlled ventilation. Chest. 2002; 122:1382–1388.

14. Edibam C, Rutten AJ, Collins DV, Bersten AD. Effect of inspiratory flow pattern and inspiratory to expiratory ratio on nonlinear elastic behavior in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003; 167:702–707.

15. McKibben AW, Ravenscraft SA. Pressure-controlled and volume-cycled mechanical ventilation. Clin Chest Med. 1996; 17:395–410.

16. Duggan M, Kavanagh BP. Pulmonary atelectasis: a pathogenic perioperative entity. Anesthesiology. 2005; 102:838–854.

17. Alvarez A, Subirana M, Benito S. Decelerating flow ventilation effects in acute respiratory failure. J Crit Care. 1998; 13:21–25.

18. Guldager H, Nielsen SL, Carl P, Soerensen MB. A comparison of volume control and pressure-regulated volume control ventilation in acute respiratory failure. Crit Care. 1997; 1:75–77.

19. Mang H, Kacmarek RM, Ritz R, Wilson RS, Kimball WP. Cardiorespiratory effects of volume- and pressure-controlled ventilation at various I/E ratios in an acute lung injury model. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995; 151:731–736.