The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Volume 17, Issue 3 , Pages 295-300, May 2010

Pressure-Controlled vs Volume-Controlled Ventilation During Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery

  • Mustafa Oğurlu, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Adnan Menderes University, Aydın, Turkey
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding Author: Mustafa Oğurlu, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Adnan Menderes University, Aydin, Turkey 09100.
  • ,
  • Mert Küçük, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasimpasa Military Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
  • ,
  • Ferruh Bilgin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
  • ,
  • Ali Sizlan, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
  • ,
  • Ömer Yanarateş, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
  • ,
  • Sami Eksert, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
  • ,
  • Emre Karaşahin, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
  • ,
  • Ahmet Coşar, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, GATA Military Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

Received 20 August 2009; accepted 20 October 2009. published online 22 March 2010.

Abstract 

Study Objective

To quantify and compare the effects of conventional volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) with the alternative mode, pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), on respiratory mechanics and noninvasive hemodynamic parameters in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Design

Randomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).

Setting

Respiratory mechanics and hemodynamic parameters were recorded for each patient at time T1, 10 minutes after induction, in the supine position; T2, 15 minutes after pneumoperitoneum, in the Trendelenburg position; and T3, 10 minutes after pneumoperitoneum withdrawal, in the supine position.

Patients

Sixty women, aged 20 to 50 years, undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, with American Society of Anesthesiologists classes I and II disease.

Interventions

Patients were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups. In the VCV group (n = 30), ventilation mode was maintained, whereas in the PCV group (n = 30), ventilation mode was changed to PVC.

Measurements and Main Results

Both groups were comparable insofar as patient characteristics, operating time, pneumoperitoneum time, anesthesia time, and mean operative time. VCV was associated with a significant increase in peak airway pressure, plateau pressure, and airway resistance at T2 (p < .05). Compliance was significantly higher in the PCV group at T2 (p < .05). No other statistically significant differences were found between the groups.

Conclusions

Both VCV and PCV seem to be equally suited for use in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. However, lower peak airway pressure, plateau pressure, and airway resistance, and higher compliance are observed with PCV in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Keywords: Laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, Laparoscopy, Pressure-controlled ventilation, Volume-controlled ventilation

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 The authors have no commercial, proprietary, or financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.

PII: S1553-4650(09)01201-1

doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2009.10.007

The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Volume 17, Issue 3 , Pages 295-300, May 2010