The Comparison of Blood Oxygenation between Dynamic Compliance Directed Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) and Conventional PEEP in Ventilator Setting of Anesthetic Machine during Balanced General Anesthesia

Authors

  • Phongsak Nitikaroon Prapokklao hospital
  • Pureelak Rattanawijarn Prapokklao hospital

Keywords:

general anesthesia,, dynamic compliance,, positive end expiratory pressure

Abstract

Background: General anesthesia promote impaired pulmonary gas exchange and contribute to postoperative pulmonary complications. Different methods of PEEP titration make the different value of intraoperative oxygenation. Objectives: To study the effect of PEEP titration on the change of intraoperative oxygenation in non-laparoscopic surgery during balanced general anesthesia between dynamic compliance directed PEEP group and conventional PEEP group. Methods: Single-blind randomized controlled trial was done from 1 July 2020 -1 February 2021. After intubation and arterial line insertion. We compared the difference of PaO2 , A-a gradient in arterial blood gas and peak airway pressure at 1st-5th minute and 10th-15th minute between dynamic compliance directed PEEP group and conventional PEEP group. Results: Thirty patients were enrolled in this study. PaO2 at 10th-15th minute in dynamic compliance directed PEEP titration group was higher than the conventional PEEP group (P-value = 0.001). A-a gradient at 10th-15th minute in dynamic compliance directed PEEP group was lesser than the conventional group (P-value = 0.001) Conclusion: Dynamic compliance directed PEEP improve intraoperative oxygenation better than conventional PEEP.

References

1. Haliloglu M, Bilgili B, Ozdemir M, Umuroglu T, Bakan N. Low
tidal volume positive end-expiratory pressure versus high
tidal volume zero-positive end-expiratory pressure and
postoperative pulmonary functions in robot-assisted
laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Med Princ Pract
2017;26:573-78.
2. Serpa Neto A, Hemmes SN, Barbas CS et al. Protective
versus conventional ventilation for surgery. A systematic
review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
Anesthesiology 2015;123:66-78.
3. Mazzinari G, Diaz-Cambonero O, Alonso-Inigo J et al.
Intraabdominal pressure targeted positive end-expiratory
pressure during laparoscopic surgery: an open-label,
nonrandomized, crossover, clinical trial. Anesthesiology
2020;132:667-77.
4. Pereira SM, Tucci MR, Morais CCA, et al. Individual positive
end-expiratory pressure settings optimize intraoperative
mechanical ventilation and reduce postoperative atelectasis.
Anesthesiology 2018;129:1070-81.
5. Hedenstierna G, Tokics L, Scaramuzzo G et al. Oxygenation
impairment during anesthesia: influence of age and body
weight. Anesthesiology 2019;131:46-57.
6. Haliloglu M, Bilgili B, Ozdemir M et al. Low tidal volume
positive end-expiratory pressure versus high tidal volume
zero-positive end-expiratory pressure and postoperative
pulmonary functions in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy. Med Princ Pract 2017;26:573-78.
7. Girrbach F, Petroff D, Schulz S et al. Individualised positive
end-expiratory pressure guided by electrical impedance
tomography for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy.Br J Anaesth 2020;125:373-82.
8. Boussarsar M, Thierry G, Jaber S, Roudot-Thoraval F,
Lemaire F, Brochard L. Relationship between ventilatory
settings and barotrauma in the acute respiratory distress
syndrome. Intensive Care Med 2002;28:406-13.

Downloads

Published

2021-05-06

How to Cite

Nitikaroon, P., & Rattanawijarn, P. (2021). The Comparison of Blood Oxygenation between Dynamic Compliance Directed Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) and Conventional PEEP in Ventilator Setting of Anesthetic Machine during Balanced General Anesthesia. Thai Journal of Anesthesiology, 47(3), 204–209. retrieved from https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/anesthai/article/view/250919

Issue

Vol. 47 No. 3 (2021): July-September

Section

Original articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright
Copyright of all articles published in the Thai Journal of Anesthesiology is held by the Thai Journal of Anesthesiology, the Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand. Submission of a manuscript constitutes the authors' agreement that, upon acceptance for publication, copyright of the work is transferred to the Journal. The content and any opinions expressed in published articles are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board or the Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand.

Licensing
All articles are published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Under this license, anyone may copy and redistribute published articles in any medium or format for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and to the Thai Journal of Anesthesiology as the original source of publication, a link to the license is included, and the material is not modified in any way. Requests for commercial use or for adaptation of published material should be directed to the editorial office.

Authors' Rights
Although copyright is held by the Journal, authors retain the right to reuse their own published material in their future scholarly works, theses and dissertations, teaching, and academic presentations, and to deposit the final published version (PDF) in institutional or subject repositories or on personal and institutional websites, without embargo, provided that the Thai Journal of Anesthesiology is clearly acknowledged as the original place of publication.