小儿喉罩通气时压力控制通气和容量控制通气的比较

目的　比较小儿喉罩通气时压力控制通气(PCV)和容量控制通气(VCV)对气道压力 和喉罩漏气的影响。方法　34例全麻下择期手术的小儿,年龄3～12岁,ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级。静脉麻醉 诱导后置入喉罩。患儿按随机顺序接受VCV和PCV两种通气方式,通气期间保持相同的呼气末二 氧化碳分压(PETCO2)。结果　PCV时气道峰压和漏气率明显低于VCV(P<0.01)。PCV时2例患 儿气道峰压>20cmH2O,而VCV时有9例患儿气道峰压>20cmH2O(P<0.05)。PETCO2和循环 参数无显著性差异。结论　小儿全麻喉罩通气期间,PCV能在较低的气道压力下提供有效的肺通气 效果。     

压力控制容量保证通气对老年患者胸腔镜肺部分切除术术后肺部并发症的影响

目的探讨压力控制-容量保证通气(pressure control ventilation with volume guarantee, PCV-VG)对老年患者胸腔镜肺部分切除术术后肺部并发症(postoperative pulmonary complication, PPC)的影响。方法选择行胸腔镜下肺段、肺叶切除术, 年龄60岁以上, PPC中高风险的患者146例。采用随机数字表法将患者按1∶1分为两组(每组73例):PCV-VG组(P组)与容积控制通气(volume controlled ventilation, VCV)组(V组)。P组压力上升时间设置为0.5 s, V组不设吸气暂停时间。收集术后1～3 d PPC发生情况、术后简易咳嗽程度评分以及6 min步行试验Borg呼吸困难评分。记录:单肺通气前即刻(T1)、单肺通气30 min (T2)、单肺通气结束前即刻(T3)、单肺通气结束15 min (T4)时的MAP; T1～T4时的潮气量和气道峰压(peak airway pressure, Ppeak), 计算肺动态顺应性(峰值气道压力顺应性);T1、T2时的PaO2。记...     

小潮气量肺保护性通气策略与压力通气模式对妇科腹腔镜手术患者氧合功能的影响

目的:评价小潮气量肺保护性通气策略(protective lung ventilation mode,PLV)与压力通气模式(pressure con-trolled ventilation,PCV)在妇科腹腔镜手术中应用的有效性及安全性。方法:拟于我院择期行妇科腹腔镜手术的患者共计144例,按随机序列号分为PLV组和PCV组,每组72例。PLV组潮气量6 ml/kg,吸呼比1∶2,呼吸频率16次/min,呼气末正压5 cmH 2O(1 cmH 2O=0.098 kPa);PCV组设定通气压力维持潮气量8 ml/kg,吸呼比1∶2,呼吸频率12~16次/min。分别于气管插管后5 min(T1)、气腹后10 min(T2)、气腹后20 min(T3)、撤除气腹后10 min(T4)记录患者气道峰压(airway peak pressure,Ppeak)、平均气道压(mean airway pressure,Pmean),并计算动态肺顺应性(dynamic lung compliance,Cdyn)。于T3、T4时点行血气分析记录PaO 2、PaCO 2、肺泡-动脉氧分压差(alveoli-arterial oxygen partial pressure,A-aDO 2),并计算氧合指数(oxygenation index,OI)。结果:PLV组T3时点Ppeak、Pmean显著高于PCV组,但Cdyn低于PCV组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PLV组T4时点Ppeak显著高于PCV组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组T2、T3时点Ppeak、Pmean较T1时点显著升高,而Cdyn显著低于T1时点,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PLV组T3时点Ppeak、Pmean显著高于T2时点,Cdyn显著低于T2时点,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PLV组T3时点PaO 2、OI显著高于PCV组,而PaCO 2、A-aDO 2显著低于PCV组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组T4时点PaO 2、OI较T3时点显著升高,而PaCO 2、A-aDO 2较T3时点显著降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组T4时点PaO 2、PaCO 2、A-aDO 2、OI差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组间各呼吸系统并发症发生情况及住院天数差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:对妇科腹腔镜手术患者而言,PCV有助于维持患者呼吸动力学稳定,而小潮气量PLV有助于维持患者术中氧合功能,二者安全性差异无统计学意义。     

单肺通气时机械通气模式的研究进展

背景 单肺通气(one lung ventilation,OLV)实施过程中最常见的并发症是低氧血症,也是麻醉医师遇到的最严重的挑战. 目的 近来研究表明OLV本身能够引起低氧血症和急性肺损伤(acute lung injury,ALI).因此,如何实施OLV时机械通气模式,降低肺内分流率(pulmonary shunt fraction,Qs/Qt)、预防低氧血症一直是临床研究的热点. 内容 综述提高吸入氧分数(fraction of inspiration O2,FiO2)、控制通气模式、高频通气(high frequency ventilation,HFV)、潮气量(tidal volume,Vt)、反比通气、部分液体通气(partial liquid ventilation,PLV)、持续气道正压通气(continuous positive airway pressure,CPAP)、呼气末正压通气(positive end-expiratory pressure,PEEP)等通气模式,以及实施联合多种模式的保护性肺通气策略. 趋向 综合运用多种预防OLV期间低氧血症的通气模式取得良好的效果,但应针对患者和手术情况制定OLV时机械通气模式.     

术侧肺部分通气法与单肺通气的比较研究

目的 与单肺通气(one-lung ventilation,OLV)比较术侧肺部分通气(partial ventilation of independent lung,PLV)情况下的氧合与气道压力.方法 16例接受食道手术的患者随机分为两组,进行自身对照交叉研究.在双肺通气后按不同顺序接受OLV和术侧肺PLV,比较3种通气时氧合指数(oxygen index,OI)及气道压力的变化.结果 两种通气方式下OI均显著低于双肺通气(two-lung ventilation,TLV),但PLV时显著高于OLV(PLV391±112,OLV134±53,TLV530±92,P<0.05);气道压力值在PLV时也显著低于OLV[Ppeak:(19±3)cm H2O vs(27±5)cm H2O,Pplat:(17±2)cm H2O vs(23±3)cm H2O,P<0.05](1 cm H2O=0.098 kPa). 结论PLV显著改善了氧合和呼吸力学指标.     

肥胖患者行腹腔镜手术3种通气模式的比较

目的观察肥胖患者行全麻腹腔镜手术时,不同的机械通气模式对病人氧合情况的影响。方法选择60例行腹部腹腔镜手术的肥胖患者,按手术日期分为3组:容量控制通气(volume control ventilation,VCV)组,压力控制通气(pressure control ventilation,PCV)组,压力控制通气联合呼气末正压通气(pressure control ventilation and positive end expiratorypressure,PCV+PEEP)组,每组20例。分别于手术开始气腹后30min(T1)、气腹后60min(T2)、手术结束后拔气管插管后30min(T3)、拔气管插管后60min(T4),采血测定pH、PCO2、氧合指数、肺内分流率。结果PCV+PEEP组T1时点氧合指数429.35±51.88显著高于VCV组346.15±54.48(q=6.771,P<0.05)和PCV组393.50±58.34(q=2.918,P<0.05),T4时点氧合指数231.87±20.47显著高于VCV组211.50±12.52(q=5.172,P<0.05)和PCV组220.12±18.84(q=2.983,P<0.05)。PCV+PEEP组T1、T2、T3、T4的肺内分流率分别为(10.94±1.40)%、(11.17±1.42)%、(10.24±1.22)%、(9.92±1.09)%显著低于VCV组(12.09±1.41)%、(12.67±1.76)%、(11.64±1.44)%、(11.34±1.38)%(q=3.771,P<0·05;q=4.772,P<0.05;q=4.872,P<0.05;q=4.772,P<0.05)。HR、MAP3组不同时点比较无明显差异(P>0·05)。结论行腹腔镜手术时,压力控制通气联合呼气末正压通气可以显著提高肥胖患者的氧合情况。     

不同通气模式在腹腔镜妇科手术肥胖患者中的应用效果评价

目的探讨压力控制通气(Pressure-controlled ventilation,PCV)与容量控制通气(Volume-controlled ventilation,VCV)对腹腔镜妇科手术肥胖患者呼吸功能及血气分析相关指标的影响。方法选取本院2014年1月至2017年6月择期于腹腔镜下行妇科手术的肥胖患者共计80例。ASA分级Ⅰ~Ⅱ级,体重指数(Body Mass Index,BMI)30kg/m2。患者采用计算机随机软件分为PCV与VCV每组各40例。于气管插管后10分钟(T_0)、气腹后10分钟(T_1)、气腹后30分钟(T_2)、撤除气腹后10分钟(T_3)记录患者气道平台压(Pplat)、气道峰压(Ppeak)、平均气道压(Pmean)、动态肺顺应性(Cdyn)。于上述各时点抽取动脉血行血气分析并记录PaO_2、PaCO_2、PH值。观察术后24小时内气胸、皮下气肿、肺水肿发生情况。结果在T_1、T_2时点,PCV组患者Pplat、Ppeak、Pmean显著低于VCV组患者,PCV组患者Cdyn显著高于VCV组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);PCV组患者PaO_2显著高于VCV组患者,PCV组患者PaCO_2显著低于VCV组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者PH值在各时点差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。所有患者均未发生气胸、皮下气肿、肺水肿等并发症。结论对行妇科腹腔镜手术的肥胖患者而言,PCV能够在气腹期间维持较低的气道压力及较高的肺顺应性,同时还能维持较高的PaO_2及较低的PaCO_2,与VCV相比具有良好的安全性和有效性。     

小儿单肺定容和定压通气对血流动力学呼吸力学及血气的影响

目的　探讨小儿单肺通气期间采用定容 (VCV)和定压 (PCV)两种不同通气模式对血流动力学、呼吸力学及血气的影响。方法　按美国麻醉协会病人全身情况评估 (ASA)I～II级择期行结扎术的先天性动脉导管未闭 (PDA)病儿 2 0例 ,麻醉诱导后气管插管 ,右侧卧位 ,先行双肺定容通气 (TLV VCV) ,再采用右肺单肺定容通气 (OLV VCV) ,2 5min后改为单肺定压通气 (OLV PCV) ,用旁气流通气监测法 (SSS)监测TLV VCV、OLV VCV、OLV PCV期间的呼吸力学参数 (Ppeak、Pplat、Raw、Cdyn、Mvi、Mve) ,同时经食管超声多普勒 (TED)监护仪连续监测血流动力学参数 (CO、SVR、SV、LVETi、ACC) ,并取动脉血作血气分析 (PaO2 、PaCO2 )。结果　单肺定容通气与双肺定容通气相比 ,Ppeak、Pplat、Raw显著增高 (P <0 0 1) ,Cdyn显著下降 (P <0 0 1) ;CO、SV显著下降 (P <0 0 5 ) ,SVR显著增加 (P <0 0 5 ) ;动脉血PaO2 显著下降 (P <0 0 1)。单肺定压通气与单肺定容通气相比 ,动脉血PaO2 显著上升 (P <0 0 5 )。结论　单肺通气可使气道压力阻力增加 ,肺顺应性下降 ,动脉血氧分压降低 ,外周血管阻力增加 ,心输出量下降 ;小儿单肺通气期间 ,采取定压通气模式 ,有利于改善肺泡氧合 ,预防和减轻单肺通气造成的低氧血症。     

不同通气模式对老年患者腹腔镜结直肠手术呼吸参数的影响

目的观察小潮气量容量控制通气(VCV)联合呼气末正压通气(PEEP)和压力控制通气(PCV)联合PEEP对老年患者呼吸参数的影响。方法选择行腹腔镜直肠、乙状结肠手术患者51例,男25例,女26例,年龄65~80岁,BMI 18~30kg/m2,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为两组:VP组(VCV+PEEP)和PP组(PCV+PEEP),每组25例。气腹期间VP组以VT6 ml/kg+5cmH2O PEEP模式通气,PP组将VT设为6 ml/kg通气3 min后切换为PCV并加用5cmH2O PEEP进行通气。记录气管插管VCV通气5min(T1)、建立人工气腹5 min(T2)、建立人工气腹35min(T3)、建立人工气腹65min(T4)、手术结束(T5)、拔管前(T6)时VT、动态肺顺应性(Cdyn)、RR、气道峰压(Ppeak)、气道平台压(Pplat)和PETCO2。记录T1、T3、T4和离开PACU(T7)时PaO2、PaCO2,并计算肺泡-动脉血氧分压差(PA-aDO2)、氧合指数(OI)、呼吸指数(RI);记录术后5d内肺部并发症(PPCs)情况。结果与VP组比较,T2-T4时PP组VT明显升高、Cdyn明显增大(P0.05),T3-T5时PP组RR明显减慢(P0.05),T2-T5时PP组Ppeak和Pplat明显降低(P0.05),T4时PP组PETCO2和PA-aDO2明显降低、PaO2明显升高、RI明显减小、OI明显增大(P0.05)。术后随访两组患者PPCs差异无统计学意义。结论PCV联合PEEP通气模式明显降低Ppeak和Pplat、增高VT和增大Cdyn,同时明显改善气腹65min时肺氧合功能,所以老年患者腹腔镜结直肠手术术中应优先考虑使用。     

术侧肺部分通气法与单肺通气的比较研究

Objective The purpose of this study was to compare oxygenation and airway pressure during partial ventilation of the independent lung( PLV) with one-lung ventilation(OLV). Methods 16 patients undergoing thoracotomy for esophageal carcinoma were randomized divided into two groups and a self -controlled cross -over study was used. Two types of ventilation was used in different sequence after two-lung ventilation(TLV), oxygenation index( OI) and airway pressure was compared between groups. Results OI was significantly lower during OLV and PLV than TLV, while it was significantly higher during PLV than OLV (PLV391±112, OLV134±53, TLV530±92,P<0.05). Airway pressure was also significantly lower during PLV than OLV[Ppeak: (19±3) cm H20 vs(27±5) cm H2O,Pplat: (17±2) cm H2O vs (23±3) cm H20, P<0.05 ]. Conclusion PLV significantly improve oxygenation and respiratory mechanics.     

Pressure versus volume-controlled ventilation with a laryngeal mask airway™ in paediatric patients

BACKGROUND: The utility of positive pressure ventilation with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in children was described previously, but the possibility of gastric insufflation, related to high peak airway pressure, continues to be a disadvantage. In this prospective study, inspiratory pressures, air leak and signs of gastric insufflation were compared between volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) using an LMA. METHODS: Thirty-two ASA I patients, aged 4.5 +/- 4 years, who were scheduled for elective procedures under combined general anaesthesia and caudal analgesia, were enrolled. After inhalation induction and LMA insertion, each patient was randomly assigned to receive successively PCV and VCV. Peak pressures (PCV) and tidal volumes (VCV) were changed in order to achieve adequate ventilation [endtidal CO2 5-5.4 kPa (38-42 mmHg)]. RESULTS: Peak airway pressures were significantly lower with PCV than VCV (14.1 +/- 1.6 cmH2O versus 16.7 +/- 2.3 cmH2O, P < 0.001). No patient ventilated with PCV required peak pressure higher than 20 cmH2O compared with six patients ventilated with VCV (P < 0.05). Haemodynamic parameters, expiratory tidal volume and percent of leak were similar in both ventilatory modes and no signs of gastric insufflation were detected. CONCLUSIONS: During general anaesthesia in children using an LMA, PCV offers lower peak inspiratory airway pressures while maintaining equal ventilation compared with VCV. Although no signs of gastric insufflation were detected in both groups, the lower pressures might be significant in patients with reduced chest wall or lung compliance.     

肝癌合并门脉高压症患者腹腔镜肝癌切除术术中通气模式的临床研究

目的研究容量控制通气(VCV)、压力控制通气(PCV)及压力控制容量保证通气(PCV-VG)对行腹腔镜肝癌切除术的肝癌合并门脉高压症(HCPH)患者术中血流动力学、呼吸力学、血气指标和术后并发症的影响。 方法前瞻性选择2017年1月至2019年6月行腹腔镜肝癌切除术的120例HCPH患者作为研究对象。采用随机数字表法将患者分为VCV组、PCV组及PCV-VG组,每组40例。采用SPSS20.0软件进行分析,并发症等计数资料使用卡方检验;患者围术期指标及各时间点[插管后气腹前10 min(T0)、气腹后30 min(T1)、气腹后1 h(T2)、气腹结束10 min(T3)]心率等用( ±s)表示,多组间采用重复方差法分析,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。 结果与T0比较,T1～T2时三组患者术中平均动脉压(MAP)、气道平均压力(Pmean)、气道峰值压力(Ppeak)、动脉氧分压(PaO₂)、呼末二氧化碳分压(PETCO₂)、动脉二氧化碳分压(PaCO₂)显著升高(P<0.05),动态肺顺应性(Cdyn)明显降低(P<0.05)。PCV-VG组在T1～T2时间段Ppeak均低于VCV组和PCV组(P<0.05),在T1～T3时间段Pmean均低于VCV组(P<005)。PCV-VG组和PCV组在T1～T2时间段Cdyn均高于VCV组(P<0.05),PCV-VG组在T2刻高于PCV组(P<0.05)。术后第7天PCV-VG组与PCV组并发症总发生率显著低于VCV组(P<0.05);PCV-VG组肺不张发生率显著低于VCV组(P<0.05)。 结论对于行腹腔镜肝癌切除术的HCPH患者,PCV-VG模式可以降低气道压力,改善肺顺应性,术后肺部相关并发症发生率较低,安全性更高。     

Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on ventilatory and oxygenation parameters during pressure-controlled one-lung ventilation

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of PEEP on oxygenation and airway pressures during PCV-OLV. DESIGN: Randomized, crossover, clinical study. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five patients undergoing thoracotomy. INTERVENTIONS: During the first 5 minutes of OLV, all patients were ventilated with VCV (PEEP: 0) (VCV-ZEEP). Afterward, ventilation was changed to PCV with PEEP: 0 (PCV-ZEEP) or PEEP: 4 cmH2O (PCV-PEEP) for 20 minutes. In the following 20 minutes, PCV-PEEP and PCV-ZEEP were applied in reverse sequence. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: At the end of VCV-ZEEP airway pressures (peak airway pressure, plateau airway pressure, mean airway pressure, and pause airway pressure) were recorded. At the end of PCV-PEEP and PCV-ZEEP airway pressures, PaO2 and Qs/Qt were recorded. Ppeak and Pplat were significantly lower with PCV-PEEP compared with VCV-ZEEP (eg, Ppeak: 33.4+/-4.2, 28.3+/-4.1, and 28.9+/-3.7 cmH2O in VCV-ZEEP, PCV-ZEEP, and PCV-PEEP, respectively; p<0.05 for PCV-ZEEP v VCV-ZEEP and PCV-PEEP v VCV-ZEEP). PCV-PEEP was associated with an increased PaO2 (230.3+/-69.8 v 189.0+/-54.8 mmHg, p<0.05) and decreased Qs/Qt (33.4%+/-7.3% v 38.4%+/-5.7%, p<0.05) compared with PCV-ZEEP (mean+/-SD). Eighty-eight percent of the patients have benefited from PEEP. CONCLUSION: During OLV, PCV with a low level of PEEP leads to improved oxygenation with lower airway pressures.     

Comparative study of pressure-control ventilation and volume-control ventilation in treating traumatic acute respiratory distress syndrome

echanicalventilationisthemosteffectivemethodintreatingtraumaticacuterespiratorydistresssyndrome (ARDS ) .Butcommonmechanicalventilationmaycausesomesideeffects ,suchas pressureinjuryanddecreaseofcardiacoutput.Inthisstudy ,4 0 patientssufferingfromtraumaticARDShospitalizedinourdepartmentfromJune 1996toDecember 2 0 0 2weretreatedwithpressure controlventilation (PCV ,n =2 0 )andvolume controlventilation (VCV ,n =2 0 ) ,respectively .METHODSClinicaldataAmongthe 4 0 patientswithtraumaticAR…     

Comparison of volume controlled with pressure controlled ventilation during one-lung anaesthesia

Pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) is an alternative mode of ventilation which is used widely in severe respiratory failure. In this study, PCV was used for one-lung anaesthesia and its effects on airway pressures, arterial oxygenation and haemodynamic state were compared with volume controlled ventilation (VCV). We studied 48 patients undergoing thoracotomy. After two-lung ventilation with VCV, patients were allocated randomly to one of two groups. In the first group (n = 24), one-lung ventilation was started by VCV and the ventilation mode was then switched to PCV. Ventilation modes were performed in the opposite order in the second group (n = 24). We observed that peak airway pressure (P = 0.000001), plateau pressure (P = 0.01) and pulmonary shunt (P = 0.03) were significantly higher during VCV, whereas arterial oxygen tension (P = 0.02) was significantly higher during PCV. Peak airway pressure (Paw) decreased consistently during PCV in every patient and the percentage reduction in Paw was 4-35% (mean 16.1 (SD 8.4) %). Arterial oxygen tension increased in 31 patients using PCV and the improvement in arterial oxygenation during PCV correlated inversely with preoperative respiratory function tests. We conclude that PCV appeared to be an alternative to VCV in patients requiring one-lung anaesthesia and may be superior to VCV in patients with respiratory disease.      

Pressure-controlled versus volume-controlled ventilation during one-lung ventilation in the prone position for robot-assisted esophagectomy

Background

The prone position during robotic esophageal mobilization for minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) provides several advantages with regards to operative times, surgeon ergonomics, and surgical view; however, this technique requires one-lung ventilation (OLV). There are no guidelines about ventilatory modes during OLV in the prone position. We investigated the effects of volume-controlled (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on oxygenation and intrapulmonary shunt during OLV in the prone position in patients who underwent robot-assisted esophagectomy.

Methods

Eighteen patients, no major obstructive or restrictive pulmonary disease, were allocated randomly to one of two groups. In the first group (n = 9), OLV was started by VCV and the ventilator was switched to PCV after 30 minutes. In the second group (n = 9), the modes of ventilation were performed in the opposite order in the prone position. Hemodynamic and respiratory variables were obtained during OLV at the end of each ventilatory mode.

Results

There were no significant differences in arterial oxygen tension (PaO₂), airway pressures, dynamic lung compliance, or physiologic dead space (Vd/Vt) during OLV between PCV and VCV in the prone position. Intrapulmonary shunt (Qs/Qt) was significantly lower with VCV than with PCV during OLV in the prone position (p = 0.044).

Conclusion

PCV provides no advantages compared with VCV with regard to respiratory and hemodynamic variables during OLV in the prone position. Either ventilatory mode can be safely used for patients who undergo robot-assisted esophagectomy and who have normal body mass index and preserved pulmonary function.     

Comparison of two protective lung ventilatory regimes on oxygenation during one-lung ventilation: a randomized controlled trial

Background  

The efficacy of protective ventilation in acute lung injury has validated its use in the operating room for patients undergoing thoracic surgery with one-lung ventilation (OLV). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of two different modes of ventilation using low tidal volumes: pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) vs. volume controlled ventilation (VCV) on oxygenation and airway pressures during OLV.     

A clinical trial of volume- versus pressure-controlled intraoperative ventilation during laparoscopic bariatric surgeries

BackgroundIntra-operative ventilation is often challenging in patients with morbid obesity undergoing bariatric surgery.ObjectivesTo test the noninferiority of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) to volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) in respiratory mechanics.SettingBariatric Surgery Center, Iran.MethodsIn a randomized open-labeled clinical trial, 66 individuals with morbid obesity undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgeries underwent intraoperative ventilation with either PCV or VCV. The measurements taken were peak and mean airway pressures (H₂O), partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO₂), partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (CO₂). We additionally collected pulse-oximetric oxygen saturation, inspiratory concentration of oxygen (FiO₂), and hemodynamic variables. Data were analyzed with repeated measures over the time of intubation, after peritoneal insufflation, and every 15 minutes, thereafter up to one hour.ResultsPCV mode was successful to sustain adequate ventilation in 97% of the patients, which was similar to the 94% success rate of the VCV mode. Peak airway pressure increased 6 cmH₂O and end-tidal CO₂ rose by 5 mm Hg after abdominal insufflation in both groups (P = .850 and .376). Alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient similarly increased within 30 minutes after tracheal intubation both in PCV and VCV groups, with small trend of being higher in the VCV group. The ratio of dead space to tidal volumes (VD/VT) did not have a meaningful change (P = .724).ConclusionPCV was noninferior to VCV during laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Either mode of ventilation could be alternatively used during the anesthesia care of these patients.