TY - JOUR
T1 - Heating and humidifying of carbon dioxide during pneumoperitoneum is not indicated
T2 - A prospective randomized trial
AU - Davis, S. S.
AU - Mikami, D. J.
AU - Newlin, M.
AU - Needleman, B. J.
AU - Barrett, M. S.
AU - Fries, R.
AU - Larson, T.
AU - Dundon, J.
AU - Goldblatt, M. I.
AU - Melvin, W. S.
PY - 2006/1
Y1 - 2006/1
N2 - Background: Carbon dioxide (CO2) pneumoperitoneum usually is created by a compressed gas source. This exposes the patient to cool dry gas delivered at room temperature (21°C) with 0% relative humidity. Various delivery methods are available for humidifying and heating CO2 gas. This study was designed to determine the effects of heating and humidifying gas for the intraabdominal environment. Methods: For this study, 44 patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a prospective, randomized, single-blinded fashion: raw CO 2 (group 1), heated CO2 (group 2), humidified CO 2 (group 3), and heated and humidified CO2 (group 4). A commercially available CO2 heater-humidifier was used. Core temperatures, intraabdominal humidity, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were monitored. Peritoneal biopsies were taken in each group at the beginning and end of the case. Biopsies were subjected staining protocols designed to identify structural damage and macrophage activity. Postoperative narcotic use, pain scale scores, recovery room time, and length of hospital stay were recorded. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare the groups. Results: Demographics, volume of CO2 used, intraabdominal humidity, bladder temperatures, lens fogging, and operative times were not significantly different between the groups. Core temperatures were stable, and intraabdominal humidity measurements approached 100% for all the patients over the entire procedure. Total narcotic dosage and pain scale scores were not statistically different. Recovery room times and length of hospital stay were similar in all the groups. Only one biopsy in the heated-humidified group snowed an increase in macrophage activity. Conclusions: The intraabdominal environment in terms of temperature and humidity was similar in all the groups. There was no significant difference in the intraoperative body temperatures or the postoperative variable measured. No histologic changes were identified. Heating or humidifying of CO2 is not justified for patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.
AB - Background: Carbon dioxide (CO2) pneumoperitoneum usually is created by a compressed gas source. This exposes the patient to cool dry gas delivered at room temperature (21°C) with 0% relative humidity. Various delivery methods are available for humidifying and heating CO2 gas. This study was designed to determine the effects of heating and humidifying gas for the intraabdominal environment. Methods: For this study, 44 patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were randomly assigned to one of four arms in a prospective, randomized, single-blinded fashion: raw CO 2 (group 1), heated CO2 (group 2), humidified CO 2 (group 3), and heated and humidified CO2 (group 4). A commercially available CO2 heater-humidifier was used. Core temperatures, intraabdominal humidity, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were monitored. Peritoneal biopsies were taken in each group at the beginning and end of the case. Biopsies were subjected staining protocols designed to identify structural damage and macrophage activity. Postoperative narcotic use, pain scale scores, recovery room time, and length of hospital stay were recorded. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare the groups. Results: Demographics, volume of CO2 used, intraabdominal humidity, bladder temperatures, lens fogging, and operative times were not significantly different between the groups. Core temperatures were stable, and intraabdominal humidity measurements approached 100% for all the patients over the entire procedure. Total narcotic dosage and pain scale scores were not statistically different. Recovery room times and length of hospital stay were similar in all the groups. Only one biopsy in the heated-humidified group snowed an increase in macrophage activity. Conclusions: The intraabdominal environment in terms of temperature and humidity was similar in all the groups. There was no significant difference in the intraoperative body temperatures or the postoperative variable measured. No histologic changes were identified. Heating or humidifying of CO2 is not justified for patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.
KW - Carbon dioxide
KW - Heated
KW - Humidified
KW - Insufflation
KW - Laparoscopy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=30744461613&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=30744461613&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00464-005-0271-x
DO - 10.1007/s00464-005-0271-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 16333546
AN - SCOPUS:30744461613
SN - 0930-2794
VL - 20
SP - 153
EP - 158
JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
IS - 1
ER -