Comparison of nasal and face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese adults: A randomised controlled study.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-22 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_404_23
Gyan Singh, Neeru Luthra, Richa Jain, Anju Grewal, Shubham Garg, Livleen Deep Mann
{"title":"Comparison of nasal and face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese adults: A randomised controlled study.","authors":"Gyan Singh, Neeru Luthra, Richa Jain, Anju Grewal, Shubham Garg, Livleen Deep Mann","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_404_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The use of a face mask while inducing general anaesthesia (GA) in obese patients is often ineffective in providing adequate ventilation. Although nasal mask ventilation has demonstrated effectiveness for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in obese patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), it has not yet been applied to the induction of anaesthesia. This study evaluated the efficacy of nasal mask ventilation against standard face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese patients with body mass index (BMI)>25 kg/m<sup>2</sup>.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety adult patients with BMI >25 kg/m<sup>2</sup> were randomly assigned to receive either facemask (Group FM) or nasal-mask (Group NM) ventilation during induction of GA. Expired tidal volume (Vt<sub>E</sub>), air leak, peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), plateau pressure (P<sub>PLAT</sub>), oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO<sub>2</sub>) were recorded for10 breaths, and their mean was analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean (standard deviation) Vt<sub>E</sub> measured was not significantly higher in Group NM [455.98 (55.64) versus 436.90 (49.50) mL, <i>P</i> = 0.08, degree of freedom (df):88, mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) -19.08 (-41.14, 2.98) mL]. Mean air-leak [16.44 (22.16) versus 31.63 (21.56) mL, <i>P</i> = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference 95%CI: 15.19 (6.03,24.35)], mean PIP [14.79 (1.39) versus 19.94 (3.05) cmH<sub>2</sub>O, <i>P</i> = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference, 95%CI: 5.15 (4.16, 6.14)], and mean P<sub>PLAT</sub> [12.04 (1.21) versus 16.66 (2.56) cmH<sub>2</sub>O, <i>P</i> = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference 95% CI: 4.62 (3.78, 5.45)] were significantly lower in Group NM. EtCO<sub>2,</sub> SpO<sub>2</sub>, and haemodynamic measurements were similar between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nasal mask ventilation is an effective ventilation method and can be used as an alternative to face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese adults with BMI>25 kg/m<sup>2</sup>.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"68 3","pages":"267-272"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10926330/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_404_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: The use of a face mask while inducing general anaesthesia (GA) in obese patients is often ineffective in providing adequate ventilation. Although nasal mask ventilation has demonstrated effectiveness for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in obese patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), it has not yet been applied to the induction of anaesthesia. This study evaluated the efficacy of nasal mask ventilation against standard face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese patients with body mass index (BMI)>25 kg/m2.

Methods: Ninety adult patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 were randomly assigned to receive either facemask (Group FM) or nasal-mask (Group NM) ventilation during induction of GA. Expired tidal volume (VtE), air leak, peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), plateau pressure (PPLAT), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) were recorded for10 breaths, and their mean was analysed.

Results: The mean (standard deviation) VtE measured was not significantly higher in Group NM [455.98 (55.64) versus 436.90 (49.50) mL, P = 0.08, degree of freedom (df):88, mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) -19.08 (-41.14, 2.98) mL]. Mean air-leak [16.44 (22.16) versus 31.63 (21.56) mL, P = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference 95%CI: 15.19 (6.03,24.35)], mean PIP [14.79 (1.39) versus 19.94 (3.05) cmH2O, P = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference, 95%CI: 5.15 (4.16, 6.14)], and mean PPLAT [12.04 (1.21) versus 16.66 (2.56) cmH2O, P = 0.001, df: 88, mean difference 95% CI: 4.62 (3.78, 5.45)] were significantly lower in Group NM. EtCO2, SpO2, and haemodynamic measurements were similar between the two groups.

Conclusion: Nasal mask ventilation is an effective ventilation method and can be used as an alternative to face mask ventilation in anaesthetised obese adults with BMI>25 kg/m2.

肥胖成人麻醉后鼻罩和面罩通气的比较:随机对照研究。
背景和目的:在对肥胖患者进行全身麻醉(GA)诱导时使用面罩通常无法有效提供充足的通气。虽然鼻罩通气已证明对患有阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)的肥胖患者持续气道正压(CPAP)有效,但尚未应用于麻醉诱导。本研究评估了鼻罩通气与标准面罩通气在体重指数(BMI)大于 25 kg/m2 的肥胖麻醉患者中的疗效:90 名体重指数大于 25 kg/m2 的成年患者在诱导 GA 时被随机分配接受面罩通气(FM 组)或鼻面罩通气(NM 组)。记录 10 次呼吸的潮气量(VtE)、漏气量、吸气峰压(PIP)、高原压(PPLAT)、血氧饱和度(SpO2)和潮气末二氧化碳(EtCO2),并分析其平均值:NM 组测得的 VtE 平均值(标准偏差)并无明显增加[455.98 (55.64) 对 436.90 (49.50) mL,P = 0.08,自由度 (df):88,平均差异(95% 置信区间 [CI])-19.08 (-41.14, 2.98) mL]。平均漏气量[16.44 (22.16) 对 31.63 (21.56) mL,P = 0.001,df:88,平均差 95%CI:15.19 (6.03,24.35)],平均 PIP [14.79 (1.39) 对 19.94 (3.05) cmH2O,P = 0.001,df:88,平均差 95%CI: 5.15 (4.16, 6.14)],以及平均 PPLAT [12.04 (1.21) 对 16.66 (2.56) cmH2O,P = 0.001,df:88,平均差异 95% CI:4.62 (3.78, 5.45)]明显低于 NM 组。两组的 EtCO2、SpO2 和血流动力学测量结果相似:结论:鼻面罩通气是一种有效的通气方法,可替代面罩通气用于体重指数大于 25 kg/m2 的肥胖成人麻醉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信