scholarly journals Spontaneous ventilation and not controlled ventilation for removal of foreign body when present in both bronchi in a child

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
Jyotsna Punj ◽  
Gururaj Nagaraj ◽  
Divya Sethi
2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 114-119
Author(s):  
ABDUL HAMEED BHATTI

Objective: To compare the effects of spontaneous versus controlled ventilation on IntraocularPressure (IOP) with concomitant haemodynamic changes during cataract extraction and intraocular (IOL) implantsurgery under anaesthesia. Design: Comparative study. Place and Duration of Study: The study was conducted atdepartment of Anesthesiology Combined Military Hospital Jhelum Cantt from Jan 2005 to Oct 2005. Subjects andMethods: 40 ASA I and II patients of both sexes aged 40-68 years, undergoing surgical cataract extraction werestudies. In 20 patients ventilation was controlled while the other 20 patients breathed spontaneously during surgery.IOP was measured preoperatively in non-operated eye.Results: Intraocular pressure (IOP) decreased below the baseline after induction of anaesthesia but it markedly increased after intubation in both group. During operation IOPdecreased more in controlled ventilation group than spontaneous ventilation group. At the end of surgery beforeextubation, IOP increased in both groups with a greater rise in spontaneous ventilation group and extubation wasfollowed by a further rise in IOP in both groups. Heart rate (HR) and arterial blood pressure (BP) changes followedalmost the same pattern as IOP. Conclusion: General anaesthetics decrease IOP in general. Laryngoscopy andintubation are anaesthesia-related events, which cause rise in IOP. In appropriate patients, general anaesthesia withcontrolled ventilation is an acceptable technique for intraocular surgery offering advantages in terms of intraocularpressure and cardiovascular stability compared to spontaneous ventilation.


2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. S. Dhara ◽  
E. H. C. Liu

This study assessed the safety of sevoflurane anaesthesia using two Komesaroff vaporizers inside the circle with both spontaneous and controlled ventilation. Sevoflurane concentrations were continuously monitored using a mass spectrometer and the anaesthetic depth was easily controlled. Involuntary movements occurred in eight patients and breathholding occurred in five patients after inhalational induction. With continuous monitoring of sevoflurane concentrations, induction and maintenance of anaesthesia using a vaporizer inside the circle is safe during both controlled and spontaneous ventilation. However the high incidence of involuntary movements may limit the feasibility of induction in spontaneously breathing patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document