Pressure-Controlled vs Volume-Controlled Ventilation During Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery

Study ObjectiveTo quantify and compare the effects of conventional volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) with the alternative mode, pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), on respiratory mechanics and noninvasive hemodynamic parameters in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.DesignRandomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).SettingRespiratory mechanics and hemodynamic parameters were recorded for each patient at time T1, 10 minutes after induction, in the supine position; T2, 15 minutes after pneumoperitoneum, in the Trendelenburg position; and T3, 10 minutes after pneumoperitoneum withdrawal, in the supine position.PatientsSixty women, aged 20 to 50 years, undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, with American Society of Anesthesiologists classes I and II disease.InterventionsPatients were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups. In the VCV group (n = 30), ventilation mode was maintained, whereas in the PCV group (n = 30), ventilation mode was changed to PVC.Measurements and Main ResultsBoth groups were comparable insofar as patient characteristics, operating time, pneumoperitoneum time, anesthesia time, and mean operative time. VCV was associated with a significant increase in peak airway pressure, plateau pressure, and airway resistance at T2 (p < .05). Compliance was significantly higher in the PCV group at T2 (p < .05). No other statistically significant differences were found between the groups.ConclusionsBoth VCV and PCV seem to be equally suited for use in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. However, lower peak airway pressure, plateau pressure, and airway resistance, and higher compliance are observed with PCV in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.