Yilmaz Gulseren, Kiyak Huseyin, Akca Aysu, Salihoglu Ziya
Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, University of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2020 Sep;15(3):519-525. doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2019.89831. Epub 2019 Nov 18.
The pulmonary recruitment maneuver (PRM) has emerged as an effective way of reducing post-laparoscopic shoulder pain (PLSP). However, the optimal lower pressure level for a PRM to reduce PLSP has not yet been investigated.
To compare the efficacy of the low-pressure PRM with moderate-pressure PRM in preventing PLSP.
Seventy-two ASA I-II patients who were scheduled for gynecologic LS for non-malignant conditions were enrolled in this study. Group 1 included patients who received the PRM at a maximum pressure of 30-40 cm HO in a semi-Fowler position and group 2 included patients who received the PRM at a maximum pressure of 15 cm HO in a semi-Fowler position. The primary outcome of the study was the difference in PLSP between the two groups.
There were no significant differences in PLSP and wound pain VAS scores between patients receiving the PRM at 30 cm HO and 15 cm HO during postoperative pain monitoring (p < 0.05). The groups were also similar with respect to ambulation time (p = 0.215), length of hospital stay (p = 0.556) and the height of the pneumoperitoneum measured on chest X-ray (p = 0.151).
The low-pressure PRM (15 cm HO pressure) provides similar efficacy as the moderate-pressure PRM (30-40 cm HO) in terms of PLSP, wound pain, height of pneumoperitoneum, time of ambulation and length of hospital stay. We suggest that lower maximal inspiratory pressure of 15 cm HO might be preferred to avoid the potential complications of the PRM with higher pressures.
肺复张手法(PRM)已成为减轻腹腔镜术后肩部疼痛(PLSP)的有效方法。然而,尚未研究PRM减轻PLSP的最佳较低压力水平。
比较低压PRM与中压PRM预防PLSP的疗效。
本研究纳入72例因非恶性疾病计划行妇科腹腔镜手术的ASA I-II级患者。第1组包括在半福勒位接受最大压力为30-40 cm H₂O的PRM的患者,第2组包括在半福勒位接受最大压力为15 cm H₂O的PRM的患者。本研究的主要结局是两组之间PLSP的差异。
术后疼痛监测期间,接受30 cm H₂O和15 cm H₂O的PRM的患者在PLSP和伤口疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)上无显著差异(p<0.05)。两组在行走时间(p = 0.215)、住院时间(p = 0.556)和胸部X线测量的气腹高度(p = 0.151)方面也相似。
在PLSP、伤口疼痛、气腹高度、行走时间和住院时间方面,低压PRM(15 cm H₂O压力)与中压PRM(30-40 cm H₂O)具有相似的疗效。我们建议,为避免较高压力的PRM的潜在并发症,可能更倾向于选择15 cm H₂O的较低最大吸气压力。