Comparison of Automated Control Anesthesia and Manual Control Anesthesia in Minimal Flow Anesthesia
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
IWith the introduction of technology into our lives, we come across two different anesthesia management modules in anesthesia machines. The first of these is the traditional method, the manual controlled anesthesia technique; the other is the automatic controlled anesthesia technique. In our daily practice, both anesthesia techniques can be used in patients who have undergone general anesthesia. These two techniques can be used in both high-flow anesthesia and low-flow anesthesia applications.
| Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
|---|---|---|
|
|
Detailed Description
In the manual technique, the inspired and exhaled gas concentrations are regulated by the anesthetists manually by the fresh gas flow during general anaesthesia. When administered manually, low-flow anesthesia requires the attention and time of the anesthesiologist, especially the difference between the gas concentrations set in the anesthesia machine and the respiratory system, and the delay between changes in fresh gas concentrations and the end tidal fraction (EtAA) of the anesthetic agent. The most important risks of manually controlled low-flow anesthesia are hypoxia and awareness that may occur due to low doses of inhaler anesthetic agents.
In the automatic controlled anesthesia technique, it is a method in which the values desired by the anesthetists during general anesthesia are determined at the beginning of anesthesia and automatically adjusted by the anesthesia device without any additional intervention. After intubation, anesthetists set 3 parameters on the anesthesia device: inspiratory or expiratory oxygen fraction (FiO2- End tidal O2 concentration), anesthetic agent concentration (MAC or End-tidal Anesthetic agent concentration) and fresh gas flow amount. With this method, it is aimed to provide safer and more stable anesthesia. In addition, it has been stated in many previous studies that automatic control anesthesia technique reduces anesthetic gas consumption and less anesthesiologist intervention is needed to reach target values.
In our study, we aimed to compare the safety, efficiency and cost aspects of automatic controlled anesthesia and manual control methods in achieving intraoperative target anesthetic and oxygen concentrations. We hypothesized that anesthesia applied with the end-tidal control method would have a lower cost, less workload, and similar anesthetic depth with the manual control method.
Study Design
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- ET-AA [10 minutes]
searching the time needed to reach the target end tidal anesthetic agent (ET-AA) concentration and the amount of anesthetic agent consumption
Secondary Outcome Measures
- target values [4 hours]
number of adjustments required to stay within target values and hemodynamic stability
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Between 18-75 year-old
-
ASA 1-3
-
Will undergo gynecological oncology operation
-
Expected surgery time (>1 hour)
Exclusion Criteria:
-
❖ BMI >30
-
Chronic opioid use
-
Contraindication to any of the anesthetic agents to be used
-
Neurological disorders
-
Surgery lasting <1 hour
Contacts and Locations
Locations
| Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sakarya University Medicine Faculty Department of Anaesthesiaology and Reanimation | Sakarya | Turkey | 54100 | |
| 2 | Sakarya University Research and Training hospital | Sakarya | Turkey | 54100 |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- Sakarya University
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Rezan Şerefoğlu, Sakarya University Research And Training hospital
Study Documents (Full-Text)
None provided.More Information
Publications
None provided.- Autocontrolled Anesthesia