Comparison of Ventilation Quality by Anatomic or Nasal Mask after Induction of General Anesthesia in Patients with Body Mass Index of above 40 kg/m2

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Associated Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 Resident, Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Considering the importance of anesthesia in people who are very obese, and the need to take the necessary activities to minimize the complications during and after the operation in these patients, this study aimed to compare ventilation quality by anatomic or nasal mask after induction of general anesthesia in patients with body mass index (BMI) of above 40 kg/m2.Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study, 70 obese patients with a BMI of more than 40 kg/m2 who were candidates for surgery were selected and randomly divided into two groups of 35. The first group were ventilated with oral mask and 100% oxygen for three minutes, and in the second group, ventilation was performed through the nasal mask. The hemodynamic and ventilation parameters and complications during and after surgery were evaluated and compared between the two groups.Findings: Evaluation of hemodynamic parameters during and after surgery did not show any clinical difference between the two groups. However, nasal ventilation patients had better ventilation and oxygenation indexes.Conclusion: The results of our study showed that the use of nasal mask instead of oral mask have a more favorable ventilation end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) and oxygenation (SpO2) in patients undergoing surgery, and the same hemodynamic stability after induction of anesthesia in very obese patients.

Keywords

References

  1. Miller RD. Miller's Anesthesia. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2010.
  2. Schlesinger S, Blanchfield D. Modified rapid-sequence induction of anesthesia: A survey of current clinical practice. AANA J 2001; 69(4): 291-8.
  3. Weingart SD. Preoxygenation, reoxygenation, and delayed sequence intubation in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 2011; 40(6): 661-7.
  4. Langeron O, Masso E, Huraux C, Guggiari M, Bianchi A, Coriat P, et al. Prediction of difficult mask ventilation. Anesthesiology 2000; 92(5): 1229-36.
  5. Ho-Tai LM, Devitt JH, Noel AG, O'Donnell MP. Gas leak and gastric insufflation during controlled ventilation: Face mask versus laryngeal mask airway. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45(3): 206-11.
  6. Jiang Y, Bao FP, Liang Y, Kimball WR, Liu Y, Zapol WM, et al. Effectiveness of breathing through nasal and oral routes in unconscious apneic adult human subjects: A prospective randomized crossover trial. Anesthesiology 2011; 115(1): 129-35.
  7. Liang Y, Kimball WR, Kacmarek RM, Zapol WM, Jiang Y. Nasal ventilation is more effective than combined oral-nasal ventilation during induction of general anesthesia in adult subjects. Anesthesiology 2008; 108(6): 998-1003.
  8. Aghadavoudi O, Nazemroaya B, Shirali M. Comparison of ventilation quality during induction of general anesthesia through nasal and face mask methods in patients with body mass index of greater than 25. Archives of Anesthesiology and Critical Care 2018; 4(3): 488-91.
  9. Itagaki T, Gubin TA, Sayal P, Jiang Y, Kacmarek RM, Anderson TA. The effectiveness of nasal mask vs face mask ventilation in anesthetized, apneic pediatric subjects over 2 years of age: a randomized controlled trial. Paediatr Anaesth 2016; 26(2): 173-81.
  10. Kapoor MC, Rana S, Singh AK, Vishal V, Sikdar I. Nasal mask ventilation is better than face mask ventilation in edentulous patients. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2016; 32(3): 314-8.
  11. Oto J, Li Q, Kimball WR, Wang J, Sabouri AS, Harrell PG, et al. Continuous positive airway pressure and ventilation are more effective with a nasal mask than a full face mask in unconscious subjects: A randomized controlled trial. Crit Care 2013; 17(6): R300.
  12. Whitacre W, Dieckmann L, Austin PN. An update: use of laryngeal mask airway devices in patients in the prone position. AANA J 2014; 82(2): 101-7.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 37, Issue 550 - Serial Number 550
September and October 2020
Pages 1233-1239

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 03 July 2019
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics