Study on the Safety of Different Pressure Artificial Pneumothorax on Endoscopic Radical Esophagectomy
- 1 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China
- 2 Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou, China
- 3 Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou, China
- 4 Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou, China
- 5 Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First People’s Hospital of Changzhou, Changzhou, China
Abstract
Objective: To study the effect of different pressure artificial pneumothorax on total endoscopic radical esophagectomy during and after an operation. Methods: From 2019 to 2021, 64 patients with esophageal cancer underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in the same surgical treatment group. The pressure of CO 2 artificial pneumothorax was randomly divided into Group A (pressure 6 mmHg), Group B (pressure 8 mmHg) , and Group C (pressure 10 mmHg). Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), end-expiratory CO 2 partial pressure (PETCO 2 ), arterial blood pH and PaCO 2 , operation time, intraoperative blood loss , and anesthesia resuscitation time were recorded at different time points. Observe the changes in inflammatory indexes, coagulation function , and the incidence of complications in the three groups, and statistically analyze and compare the differences among the three groups of patients. Results: Sixty-four patients with esophageal cancer were included in this clinical study. There were no significant differences in gender, age, lung function, BMI , and coagulation function among the three groups (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in PETCO 2 , arterial pH , and PaCO 2 in T2, T3 , and T4 among the three groups (P < 0.05). The arterial blood gas index at T5 in Group A was significantly different from that in Group C (P < 0.05). The time of thoracic operation in Group A was significantly longer than that in the other two groups (P < 0.05), and the time of tracheal intubation and extubation was earlier in Group A (P < 0.05). The incidence of subcutaneous emphysema, thoracic tube time , and prothrombin time in Group A was significantly different from those in Group B and C (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in hospitalization days, pulmonary infection , and other complications (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The artificial pneumothorax with 6 mmHg pressure and 8 L/min flow rate can satisfy the operation, and its safety and postoperative recovery are also better.
- Chen, W., Zheng, R., Baade, P.D., et al. (2016) Cancer Statistics in China, 2015. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 66, 115-32. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21338
- Lordick, F., Mariette, C., Haustermans, K., et al. (2016) Oesophageal Cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-Up. Annals of Oncology, 27, v50-v57. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw329
- Kurowski, K., Corcoles Padilla, J.M. and Matuszek, J. (2019) EP1.15-24 Video-Assisted Thoracoscopy Approach for Radical Thymoma Resection. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 14, S1061-S1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2019.08.2359
- Lerut, T. (2017) Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery in Esophageal Diseases: An Introduction. Journal of Visualized Surgery, 3, Article No. 182. https://doi.org/10.21037/jovs.2017.11.04
- Yamashita, H., Seto, Y., Takenaka, R., et al. (2017) Survival Comparison between Radical Surgery and Definitive Chemoradiation in 267 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinomas in a Single Institution: A Propensity-Matched Study. PloS ONE, 12, e0177133. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177133
- Takeuchi, H., Miyata, H., Ozawa, S., et al. (2017) Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes between Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Using a Nationwide Database in Japan. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 24, 1821-1827. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5808-4
- Kumar, G.S. (2014) Permissive Hypercapnia: Is There Any Upper Limit? Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 18, 612-614. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.140154
- Moreault, O., Couture, E.J., Provencher, S., Somma, J., Lohser, J., Ugalde, P.A., Lemieux, J., Lellouche, F. and Bussières, J.S. (2021) Double-Lumen Endotracheal Tubes and Bronchial Blockers Exhibit Similar Lung Collapse Physiology during Lung Isolation. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 68, 791-800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-021-01938-y
- Myers, C.F., Fontao, F., Jánosi, T.Z., Boda, K., Peták, F. and Habre, W. (2011) Sevoflurane and Desflurane Protect Cholinergic-Induced Bronchoconstriction of Hyperreactive Airways in Rabbits. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 58, 1007-1015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-011-9578-3
- Cao, F.T., Cui, Y., Mao, J., Wan, F. and Tu, S. (2019) Application of Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Combined with PetCO 2 Monitoring for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Combined with Severe Respiratory Failure. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 29, 545-548. https://doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2019.06.545