Comparison of volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation during laparoscopic gastric banding in morbidly obese patients.

BACKGROUND: There are no guidelines on ventilation modes in morbidly obese patients. We investigated the effects of volume-controlled (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and cardiovascular responses in laparoscopic gastric banding procedures. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval, 24 adult consenting patients scheduled for laparoscopic gastric banding were studied. Anesthesia was standardized using remifentanil, propofol, rocuronium, and sevoflurane. All patients started with VCV with a tidal volume of 10 ml kg(-1) ideal body weight, respiratory rate adjusted to obtain an end-tidal carbon dioxide of 35-40 mmHg, positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O, an inspiratory pause of 10% and an inspiratory/expiratory ratio of 1:2. Fifteen minutes after pneumoperitoneum, the patients were randomly allocated to two groups. In Group VCV (n = 12), ventilation was with the same parameters. In Group PCV (n = 12), the airway pressure was set to provide a tidal volume of 10 ml kg(-1) ideal body weight without exceeding 35 cm H2O. Respiratory rate was adjusted to keep an end-tidal carbon dioxide of 35-40 mmHg. Arterial blood samples were drawn after surgical positioning and 15 min after allocation. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: With constant minute ventilation, VCV generates equal airway pressures and cardiovascular effects with a lower PaCO2 as compared to PCV (42.5 (5.2) mmHg versus 48.9 (4.3) mmHg, p < 0.01 ANOVA). Arterial oxygenation remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: VCV and PCV appear to be an equally suited ventilatory technique for laparoscopic procedures in morbidly obese patients. Carbon dioxide elimination is more efficient when using VCV.

Influence of intraoperative opioid on postoperative pain and pulmonary function after laparoscopic gastric banding: remifentanil TCI vs sufentanil TCI in morbid obesity.

BACKGROUND: Choice of opioid may influence postoperative pain, recovery, and respiratory homeostasis in morbid obesity. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of target-controlled infusions (TCIs) of remifentanil or sufentanil on postoperative analgesia, recovery, and pulmonary function after laparoscopic gastric banding. METHODS: Forty morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric banding received BIS-guided desflurane anaesthesia combined with remifentanil TCI (Group R) or sufentanil TCI (Group S). Intraoperative haemodynamic stability, BIS controllability, and immediate recovery in the operating room were measured. Pulmonary function, modified Aldrete score, modified Observers Assessment of Alertness and Sedation score, blood gas analysis, and visual analogue score for pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting were measured on admission to the post-anaesthesia care unit and 30, 60, 120 min afterwards. After operation, patients received patient-controlled analgesia with morphine. RESULTS: During the first two postoperative hours, cumulative morphine consumption was higher in the remifentanil group compared with the sufentanil group, but was equal values after that time. Recovery profiles and spirometry showed no significant differences. During maintenance, remifentanil gave a better haemodynamic stability. CONCLUSIONS: As few differences occurred in the postoperative period, the theoretical advantage of remifentanil over the longer acting sufentanil can be questioned when using TCI technology.

Time course of inhaled anaesthetic drug delivery using a new multifunctional closed-circuit anaesthesia ventilator. In vitro comparison with a classical anaesthesia machine.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to detail the time-course, defined as the changes in end-tidal drug concentration with time, and consumption of inhaled anaesthetics when using a multifunctional closed-circuit anaesthesia machine in various drug delivery modes, and to compare it with a classical anaesthesia machine using an out-of-circle vaporizer under high and low fresh gas flow conditions. METHODS: Using an artificial test lung, sevoflurane and desflurane time-course and consumption were compared when using the Zeus apparatus (Dräger, Lubeck, Germany) with direct injection of inhaled anaesthetics or the Primus apparatus (Dräger, Lubeck, Germany) using a classical out-of-circle vaporizer. Anaesthetics were targeted at 1 and 2 MAC end-tidal during 15 min. For both apparatus, out-of-circle high and low fresh gas control (FGC) and for Zeus, auto-control (AC) modes (fixed fresh gas flow at 6 and 1 litre min(-1) and uptake mode) were compared. Time to reach target, initial overshoot and stability at target, and wash-out times were compared. RESULTS: In FGC, an initial overshoot in end-tidal drug concentration is seen when using 6 litre min(-1) fresh gas flow and a slower time course is observed when using only 1 litre min(-1) in both apparatus. In auto-control mode, the time course of both sevoflurane and desflurane was very fast and not influenced by the changes in fresh gas flow. No overshoot at target was seen. At all settings, the wash-out times were faster when using Zeus than Primus. Inhaled anaesthetic consumption was lowest with the Zeus ventilator in uptake AC mode. CONCLUSION: A combination of the fastest time course and lowest consumption of sevoflurane and desflurane was found when using the Zeus apparatus in AC uptake mode.

Optimization of desflurane administration in morbidly obese patients: a comparison with sevoflurane using an 'inhalation bolus' technique.

BACKGROUND: The concept of an 'inhalation bolus' can be used to optimize inhaled drug administration. We investigated the depth of anaesthesia, haemodynamic stability, and recovery time in morbidly obese patients resulting from bispectral index (BIS)-guided sevoflurane or desflurane administration and BIS-triggered inhalation boluses of sevoflurane or desflurane combined with titration of remifentanil. METHODS: Fifty morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic gastroplasty received either BIS-guided sevoflurane or desflurane anaesthesia in combination with a remifentanil target-controlled infusion. Intraoperative haemodynamic stability and BIS control were measured. Immediate recovery was recorded. RESULTS: Intraoperatively, the BIS was between 40 and 60 for a greater percentage of time in the sevoflurane (78 (13)% of case time) than in the desflurane patients (64 (14)% of case time), owing to too profound anaesthesia in the desflurane patients at the start of the procedure. However, fewer episodes of hypotension were found in the desflurane group, without the occurrence of more hypertensive episodes. During immediate recovery, eye opening, extubation, airway maintenance, and orientation occurred sooner in the desflurane group. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate recovery was significantly faster in the desflurane group. Overall hypnotic controllability measured by BIS was less accurate with desflurane. Overall haemodynamic controllability was better when using desflurane. Fewer episodes of hypotension were found in the desflurane group. The use of the inhalation bolus was found to be appropriate in both groups without causing severe haemodynamic side effects. Minimal BIS values were significantly lower after a desflurane bolus.