A clinical study of lung function protection in patients with robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effect of manipulative pulmonary protective strategy on the pulmonary function of the patients undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy under multiple-mode monitoring. Methods One hundred and twenty patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were divided into 4 groups (30 cases in each group) according to ASA Ⅰ-Ⅲ. Multimodal monitoring + manual relaxation group (group Mm), multimodal monitoring group (group M), conventional anesthesia + manual relaxation group (group m) and conventional anesthesia group (group C). In group Mm and group M, propofol was infused to achieve the BIS value of 45-55, then we monitored the muscle relaxation to conduct closed-loop infusion of cisatracurium. We also monitored and managed liquid input by vigileo. Group M and group C maintained peak airway pressure (≤30 cmH2O) (1 cmH2O=0.098 kPa) and PETCO2 35-40 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa). Group Mm and group m received manual lung recruitment maneuver one times every 30 min after establishment of pneumoperitoneum until the end of operation. Blood gas analysis was performed before anesthesia induction (T1), 15 min after intubation (T2), 10 min after pneumoperitoneum (T3), 30 min after pneumoperitoneum (T4), 60 min after Trendelenburg (T5), 10 min after pneumoperitoneum cessation (T6), 5 min after extubation (T7). Airway peak pressure (Ppeak) and airway plateau pressure (Pplat) were recorded. The value of dynamic lung compliance (Cdyn), spiro-index (RI), dying cavity rate (VD/VT), oxygenation index (PaO2/FiO2) and alveolar arterial PO2 difference (A-aDO2) were calculated at different time points. Results Ppeak of group Mm and group m were more stable than Ppeak of group M and group C at T3 and T4 (P<0.05). Pplat of group Mm and group m were more stable than Pplat of group M and group C at T3 and T5 (P<0.05). Oxygenation indexes of group Mm and group m were higher than indexes of group M and group C at T5-T7 (P<0.05). A-aDO2 and RI were lower than group M and group C at T4, T5, T7 (P<0.05). At T4-T6, Cdyn was higher than Cdyn in group M and group C (P<0.05). Conclusions Manipulative pulmonary protective ventilation can improve the pulmonary function in patients undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy under multimode monitoring. Key words: Robot; Therapeutic laparoscopy; Protective lung ventilation; Multi-mode monitoring; Prostate cancer