压力控制与手动面罩通气用于成人麻醉诱导:一项随机对照非劣效性试验。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-21 DOI:10.1111/aas.14308
Lennart Edmark, Emma-Karin Englund, Alexandra Schöttle Jonsson, Almira Teskeredzic Zilic, Per Cajander, Erland Östberg
{"title":"压力控制与手动面罩通气用于成人麻醉诱导:一项随机对照非劣效性试验。","authors":"Lennart Edmark,&nbsp;Emma-Karin Englund,&nbsp;Alexandra Schöttle Jonsson,&nbsp;Almira Teskeredzic Zilic,&nbsp;Per Cajander,&nbsp;Erland Östberg","doi":"10.1111/aas.14308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pressure-controlled face mask ventilation (PC-FMV) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) after apnoea following induction of general anaesthesia prolongs safe apnoea time and reduces atelectasis formation. However, depending on the set inspiratory pressure, a delayed confirmation of a patent airway might occur. We hypothesised that by lowering the peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) when using PC-FMV with PEEP, confirmation of a patent airway would not be delayed as studied by the first return of CO<sub>2</sub> , compared with manual face mask ventilation (Manual FMV).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-centre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Seventy adult patients scheduled for elective day-case surgery under general anaesthesia with body mass index between 18.5 and 29.9 kg m<sup>-2</sup> <sub>,</sub> American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes I-III, and without anticipated difficult FMV, were included. Before the start of pre-oxygenation and induction of general anaesthesia, participants were randomly allocated to receive ventilation with either PC-FMV with PEEP, at a PIP of 11 and a PEEP of 6 cmH<sub>2</sub> O or Manual FMV, with the adjustable pressure-limiting valve set at 11 cmH<sub>2</sub> O. The primary outcome variable was the number of ventilatory attempts needed until confirmation of a patent airway, defined as the return of at least 1.3 kPa CO<sub>2</sub> .</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The return of ≥1.3 kPa CO<sub>2</sub> on the capnography curve was observed after mean ± SD, 3.6 ± 4.2 and 2.5 ± 1.9 ventilatory attempts/breaths with PC-FMV with PEEP and Manual FMV, respectively. The difference in means (1.1 ventilatory attempts/breaths) had a 99% CI of -1.0 to 3.1, within the accepted upper margin of four breaths for non-inferiority.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following induction of general anaesthesia, PC-FMV with PEEP was used without delaying a patent airway as confirmed with capnography, if moderate pressures were used.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1356-1362"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pressure-controlled versus manual facemask ventilation for anaesthetic induction in adults: A randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.\",\"authors\":\"Lennart Edmark,&nbsp;Emma-Karin Englund,&nbsp;Alexandra Schöttle Jonsson,&nbsp;Almira Teskeredzic Zilic,&nbsp;Per Cajander,&nbsp;Erland Östberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14308\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pressure-controlled face mask ventilation (PC-FMV) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) after apnoea following induction of general anaesthesia prolongs safe apnoea time and reduces atelectasis formation. However, depending on the set inspiratory pressure, a delayed confirmation of a patent airway might occur. We hypothesised that by lowering the peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) when using PC-FMV with PEEP, confirmation of a patent airway would not be delayed as studied by the first return of CO<sub>2</sub> , compared with manual face mask ventilation (Manual FMV).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-centre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Seventy adult patients scheduled for elective day-case surgery under general anaesthesia with body mass index between 18.5 and 29.9 kg m<sup>-2</sup> <sub>,</sub> American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes I-III, and without anticipated difficult FMV, were included. Before the start of pre-oxygenation and induction of general anaesthesia, participants were randomly allocated to receive ventilation with either PC-FMV with PEEP, at a PIP of 11 and a PEEP of 6 cmH<sub>2</sub> O or Manual FMV, with the adjustable pressure-limiting valve set at 11 cmH<sub>2</sub> O. The primary outcome variable was the number of ventilatory attempts needed until confirmation of a patent airway, defined as the return of at least 1.3 kPa CO<sub>2</sub> .</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The return of ≥1.3 kPa CO<sub>2</sub> on the capnography curve was observed after mean ± SD, 3.6 ± 4.2 and 2.5 ± 1.9 ventilatory attempts/breaths with PC-FMV with PEEP and Manual FMV, respectively. The difference in means (1.1 ventilatory attempts/breaths) had a 99% CI of -1.0 to 3.1, within the accepted upper margin of four breaths for non-inferiority.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following induction of general anaesthesia, PC-FMV with PEEP was used without delaying a patent airway as confirmed with capnography, if moderate pressures were used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1356-1362\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14308\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14308","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全麻诱导后呼吸暂停后的压力控制面罩通气(PC-FMV)和呼气末正压(PEEP)延长了安全的呼吸暂停时间,减少了肺不张的形成。然而,根据设定的吸气压力,可能会出现气道通畅的延迟确认。我们假设,与手动面罩通气(手动FMV)相比,当使用PC-FMV和PEEP时,通过降低峰值吸气压力(PIP),气道通畅的确认不会因CO2的首次返回而延迟。方法:这是一项单中心、随机对照的非劣效性试验。70名成年患者计划在全身麻醉下接受择期日间病例手术,体重指数在18.5至29.9之间 公斤 m-2,美国麻醉师学会(ASA)I-III级,并且没有预期的困难FMV。在开始预氧合和全身麻醉诱导之前,参与者被随机分配接受带PEEP的PC-FMV通气,PIP为11,PEEP为6 cmH2 O或手动FMV,可调限压阀设置为11 cmH2 O。主要的结果变量是在确认气道通畅之前所需的通气尝试次数,定义为至少1.3次的返回 kPa CO2。结果:返回≥1.3 在平均值之后,在二氧化碳描记图曲线上观察到kPa CO2 ± SD,3.6 ± 4.2和2.5 ± 分别用带PEEP的PC-FMV和手动FMV进行1.9次通气尝试/呼吸。平均值(1.1次通气尝试/次呼吸)的差异具有-1.0至3.1的99%CI,在可接受的四次呼吸的上限范围内。结论:全身麻醉诱导后,如果使用中等压力,则使用带PEEP的PC-FMV,而不会延迟经二氧化碳描记术证实的气道通畅。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pressure-controlled versus manual facemask ventilation for anaesthetic induction in adults: A randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Background: Pressure-controlled face mask ventilation (PC-FMV) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) after apnoea following induction of general anaesthesia prolongs safe apnoea time and reduces atelectasis formation. However, depending on the set inspiratory pressure, a delayed confirmation of a patent airway might occur. We hypothesised that by lowering the peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) when using PC-FMV with PEEP, confirmation of a patent airway would not be delayed as studied by the first return of CO2 , compared with manual face mask ventilation (Manual FMV).

Methods: This was a single-centre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Seventy adult patients scheduled for elective day-case surgery under general anaesthesia with body mass index between 18.5 and 29.9 kg m-2 , American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes I-III, and without anticipated difficult FMV, were included. Before the start of pre-oxygenation and induction of general anaesthesia, participants were randomly allocated to receive ventilation with either PC-FMV with PEEP, at a PIP of 11 and a PEEP of 6 cmH2 O or Manual FMV, with the adjustable pressure-limiting valve set at 11 cmH2 O. The primary outcome variable was the number of ventilatory attempts needed until confirmation of a patent airway, defined as the return of at least 1.3 kPa CO2 .

Results: The return of ≥1.3 kPa CO2 on the capnography curve was observed after mean ± SD, 3.6 ± 4.2 and 2.5 ± 1.9 ventilatory attempts/breaths with PC-FMV with PEEP and Manual FMV, respectively. The difference in means (1.1 ventilatory attempts/breaths) had a 99% CI of -1.0 to 3.1, within the accepted upper margin of four breaths for non-inferiority.

Conclusion: Following induction of general anaesthesia, PC-FMV with PEEP was used without delaying a patent airway as confirmed with capnography, if moderate pressures were used.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
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