Comparative Evaluation of Cost and Benefit of Two High and Low End-Inspiratory Carbon Dioxide Pulmonary Mechanical Ventilation during General Anesthesia

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Anesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center AND Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Student of Medicine, School of Medicine AND Student Research Committee, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: During pulmonary mechanical ventilation in general anesthesia, end tidal carbon dioxide concentration should be preserved in the range of 0-1 mmHg. It seems that pulmonary ventilation with high end-inspiratory carbon dioxide concentration prevents loss of fresh inspiratory gases and inhalation anesthetic drugs and is affordable. This study was designed to evaluate the cost and benefit of two different anesthesia methods, high and low end-inspiratory carbon dioxide concentration.Methods: In this prospective, randomized and single-blind clinical trial, patients were studied in two groups of 34. Patients were ventilated with high and low end-inspiratory carbon dioxide concentrations in study and blank groups. Objectives were end- inspiratory and expiratory carbon dioxide concentration, amount of fresh inspiratory gas, and isoflurane and soda lime consumption and their costs.Findings: The amount of fresh inspiratory gas consumption and its costs over the duration of surgery was significantly lower in the test group (P < 0.001). The amount and cost of consumed isoflurane during surgery was significantly lower in the test group, too (P < 0.001)Conclusion: In general anesthesia, pulmonary mechanical ventilation with high end-inspiratory carbon dioxide concentration lead to lower consumption of fresh inspiratory gases, inhaled anesthetics and soda lime. Ultimately, lower costs are imposed to patients and healthcare system.

Keywords

References

  1. Baum JA. Low-flow anesthesia: theory, practice, technical preconditions, advantages, and foreign gas accumulation. J Anesth 1999; 13(3): 166-74.
  2. Eskaros SM, Papadakos PJ, Lachmann B. Respiratory monitoring. In: Miller RD, editor. Miller's anesthesia. 7th ed. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone; 2010. p. 1411-41.
  3. Brockwell RC, Andrews JJ. Inhaled anesthetic delivery systems. In: Miller RD, editor. Miller's anesthesia. 7th ed. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone; 2010. p. 667-718.
  4. Grigoliia GN, Makhatadze TA, Sulakvelidze k, Tutberidze k, Gvelesiani LG. Theory and practice of low-flow anaesthesia. Georgian Med News 2007; (145): 7-12.
  5. Honemann C, Hagemann O, Doll D. Inhalational anaesthesia with low fresh gas flow. Indian J Anaesth 2013; 57(4): 345-50.
  6. Kleemann PP. Humidity of anaesthetic gases with respect to low flow anaesthesia. Anaesth Intensive Care 1994; 22(4): 396-408.
  7. Aldrete JA, Cubillos P, Sherrill D. Humidity and temperature changes during low flow and closed system anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1981; 25(4): 312-4.
  8. Suttner S, Boldt J. Low-flow anaesthesia. Does it have potential pharmacoeconomic consequences? Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17(6): 585-90.
  9. Baum JA, Aitkenhead AR. Low-flow anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1995; 50 Suppl: 37-44.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 32, Issue 299 - Serial Number 299
July and August 2014
Pages 1379-1387

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 22 September 2013
  • Revise Date: 27 April 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics