Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Pressure-Controlled Ventilation and Volume-Controlled Ventilation in ARDS

CHEST Journal ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 117 (6) ◽  
pp. 1690-1696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Esteban ◽  
Inmaculada Alía ◽  
Federico Gordo ◽  
Raúl de Pablo ◽  
José Suarez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Prospective Randomized Trial ◽  
Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Pressure Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Volume Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Volume Controlled ◽  
Pressure Controlled

scholarly journals Comparison of Volume-Guaranteed or -Targeted, Pressure-Controlled Ventilation with Volume-Controlled Ventilation during Elective Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1276
Author(s):  
Volker Schick ◽  
Fabian Dusse ◽  
Ronny Eckardt ◽  
Steffen Kerkhoff ◽  
Simone Commotio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lung Ventilation ◽  
One Lung Ventilation ◽  
Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Pressure Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Volume Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Volume Controlled ◽  
Pressure Controlled

For perioperative mechanical ventilation under general anesthesia, modern respirators aim at combining the benefits of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) in modes typically named “volume-guaranteed” or “volume-targeted” pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV-VG). This systematic review and meta-analysis tested the hypothesis that PCV-VG modes of ventilation could be beneficial in terms of improved airway pressures (Ppeak, Pplateau, Pmean), dynamic compliance (Cdyn), or arterial blood gases (PaO2, PaCO2) in adults undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia. Three major medical electronic databases were searched with predefined search strategies and publications were systematically evaluated according to the Cochrane Review Methods. Continuous variables were tested for mean differences using the inverse variance method and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Based on the assumption that intervention effects across studies were not identical, a random effects model was chosen. Assessment for heterogeneity was performed with the χ2 test and the I2 statistic. As primary endpoints, Ppeak, Pplateau, Pmean, Cdyn, PaO2, and PaCO2 were evaluated. Of the 725 publications identified, 17 finally met eligibility criteria, with a total of 929 patients recruited. Under supine two-lung ventilation, PCV-VG resulted in significantly reduced Ppeak (15 studies) and Pplateau (9 studies) as well as higher Cdyn (9 studies), compared with VCV [random effects models; Ppeak: CI −3.26 to −1.47; p < 0.001; I2 = 82%; Pplateau: −3.12 to −0.12; p = 0.03; I2 = 90%; Cdyn: CI 3.42 to 8.65; p < 0.001; I2 = 90%]. For one-lung ventilation (8 studies), PCV-VG allowed for significantly lower Ppeak and higher PaO2 compared with VCV. In Trendelenburg position (5 studies), this effect was significant for Ppeak only. This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that volume-targeting, pressure-controlled ventilation modes may provide benefits with respect to the improved airway dynamics in two- and one-lung ventilation, and improved oxygenation in one-lung ventilation in adults undergoing elective surgery.

A comparison of the cardiopulmonary effects of pressure controlled ventilation and volume controlled ventilation in healthy anesthetized dogs

2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 524-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise T. Fantoni ◽  
Keila K. Ida ◽  
Thomas F. T. Lopes ◽  
Denise A. Otsuki ◽  
José Otávio C. Auler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Pressure Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Volume Controlled Ventilation ◽  
Anesthetized Dogs ◽  
Volume Controlled ◽  
Pressure Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document