Background The purpose of the study was to compare the effect of using volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) versus pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on blood loss in patients undergoing posterior lumbar inter-body fusion (PLIF) surgery. Methods In a randomized, single-blinded, parallel design, 78 patients, candidates for PLIF surgery, were randomly allocated into two groups of 39 to be mechanically ventilated using VCV or PCV mode. All the patients were operated in prone position by one surgeon. Amount of intraoperative surgical bleeding, transfusion requirement, surgeon satisfaction, hemodynamic parameters, heart rate, and blood pressure were measured as outcomes. Results PCV group showed slightly better outcomes than VCV group in terms of mean blood loss (431 cc vs. 465 cc), transfusion requirement (0.40 vs. 0.43 unit), and surgeon satisfaction (82.1% vs. 74.4%); however, the differences were not statistically significant. Diastolic blood pressure 90 and 105 min after induction were significantly lower in PCV group (P = 0.043–0.019, respectively); however, blood pressure at other times, hemoglobin levels, and mean heart rate were similar in two groups. Conclusions In patients undergoing posterior lumbar inter-body fusion surgery, mode of ventilation cannot make significant difference in terms of blood loss; however, some minor benefits in outcomes may lead to the selection of PCV rather than VCV. More studies with larger sample size, and investigating more factors may be needed.
Background The purpose of the study was to compare the effect of using Volume-Controlled Ventilation (VCV) versus Pressure-Controlled Ventilation (PCV) on blood loss in patients undergoing Posterior Lumbar Inter body Fusion (PLIF) surgery. Methods In a randomized, single-blinded, parallel design, 78 patients candidate for PLIF surgery were randomly allocated into two groups of 39 to mechanically ventilated using VCV or PCV mode. All the patients were operated in prone position by one surgeon. Amount of intraoperative surgical bleeding, transfusion requirement, surgeon satisfaction, hemodynamic parameters, heart rate, and blood pressure were measured as outcomes. Results PCV group showed slightly better outcomes than VCV group in terms of mean blood loss (431 cc vs. 465 cc), transfusion requirement (0.40 vs. 0.43 unit), and surgeon satisfaction (82.1% vs. 74.4%); however, the differences were not statistically significant. Diastolic blood pressure 90 and 105 min. after induction were significantly lower in PCV group (P = 0.043 & 0.019 respectively); however, blood pressure in other times, hemoglobin levels, and mean heart rate were similar in two groups. Conclusions In patients undergoing Posterior Lumbar Inter body Fusion surgery, mode of ventilation cannot make significant difference in terms of blood loss; however, some minor benefits in outcomes may lead to the selection of PCV rather than VCV. More studies with larger sample size, and investigating more factors may be needed.
Background this study has examined modes of mechanical ventilation, pressure or volume-controlled ventilation (PCV or VCV) on intra- and post-operative surgical bleeding in posterior lumbar inter body fusion (PLIF) surgery Methods This research was a randomized, single-blinded, and parallel study, that 78 patients were selected. They mechanically ventilated using either PCV or VCV in PLIF surgery. In this regard, a permuted block randomization was used with a computer-generated list. After induction of anesthesia in supine position, the hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were measured Results The mean bleeding was 431.281 ± 361.04cc in the PCV group and 465.26 ± 338.16 cc in the VCV group (p = 0.669). Moreover, blood transfusion rates in the PCV and VCV groups were 0.40 ± 0.74 and 0.43±78 0.78 pack cell (p = 0.836), respectively. Notably, surgeon satisfaction was more observed in the PCV group (82.1% vs. 74.4%, p = 0.548). In addition, the other variables were similar in these two groups. Conclusions The mean bleeding volume was higher in the VCV group compared to the PCV group; however, no significant difference was observed between these two groups. Hemoglobin levels in the patients included before and after surgery showed that the two groups were in a similar condition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.