Comparison of AutoFlow and conventional volume-controlled ventilation using LMA ProSeal during gynecological laparoscopic surgery
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Patients undergo gynecological laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia
- Registration Number
- JPRN-UMIN000023173
- Lead Sponsor
- JCHO Tokuyama Central Hospital, Department of Anesthesiology
- Brief Summary
Data from 40 patients in the AutoFlow group and 39 in the VCV group were used for analysis. PAWP at pneumoperitoneum pressure and in the Trendelenburg position was significantly lower in the AutoFlow group than in the VCV group [median (interquartile range), 16 (15-18) cmH2O vs. 18 (17-19) cmH2O; P < 0.001]. Airway leak occurred in four patients in the AutoFlow group and in two patients in the VCV group; however, this incidence was not significantly different (P = 0.68).
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Complete: follow-up complete
- Sex
- Female
- Target Recruitment
- 80
Inclusion Criteria
Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
Patients considered inadequate for intraoperative airway management using LMA ProSeal
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Peak airway pressure during pneumoperitoneum and trendelenburg position
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method eak from LMA ProSeal during pneumoperitoneum and trendelenburg position Peak airway pressure before pneumoperitoneum Peak airway pressure shortly after initiation of pneumoperitoneum