Comparison of the Single Breath Vital Capacity Technique with the Tidal Volume Technique

Singh, Jashandeep; Tandukar, Alex; Kharbuja, Kalpana

doi:10.3126/jnps.v38i2.20145

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another pediatric study showed similar results with VCRII producing fewer adverse events, faster induction and better patient satisfaction compared with TV using 8% sevoflurane. 15 A similar study in adults using sevoflurane and nitrous oxide showed that VCRII, in comparison with stepwise tidal ventilation induction, resulted in an earlier loss of consciousness (54 ± 10 seconds vs. 108 ± 19 seconds) but was associated with a higher incidence of coughing. 16 This study used a lower concentration of sevoflurane at 4.5% which explains the longer induction times compared to our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Comparison of vital capacity rapid inhalation and tidal ventilation induction with sevoflurane in adults

Viswanath

Pulickal

Chirayath

et al. 2021

Medical Gas Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vital capacity rapid inhalation induction (VCRII) results in faster achievement of desired minimum alveolar concentration while reducing the incidence of excitatory phenomenon compared to conventional incremental technique. This study aimed to determine whether the VCRII can achieve faster induction of anesthesia in adults compared to the traditional tidal ventilation (TV) technique. Following the approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee, Amala Institute of Medical Sciences, with an approval No. AIMSIEC/07/2017, on July 1, 2017, 51 adults belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II, undergoing elective surgery at a tertiary care teaching hospital were prospectively assigned to two groups: 25 in VCRII (38.3 ± 13.3 years old, 20 (80%) females) and 26 in TV inhalation induction (35.2 ± 11.9 years old, 17 (65%) females) using 8% sevoflurane in 66% nitrous oxide. The induction time, such as time (in seconds) to the cessation of voluntary finger tapping, time to loss of eyelash reflex, time to return of regular breathing, the return of conjugate gaze, was measured. The primary outcome was time to induction as defined by time to loss of eyelash reflex. Hemodynamic effects of both methods were compared at baseline and 1, 3, 5, 10, 15-minute intervals from induction. Induction was significantly faster in the VCRII group compared with the TV group in all the measured parameters. Hemodynamic parameters were comparable in both the groups. VCRII resulted in a faster induction time compared to the TV technique in adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Comparison of vital capacity rapid inhalation and tidal ventilation induction with sevoflurane in adults

Viswanath

Pulickal

Chirayath

et al. 2021

Medical Gas Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We chose vital capacity induction (VCI) method with8% sevoflurane because this method has faster onset of induction with less side effects such as cough, laryngospasm, involuntary movements in comparison to other method of inhalational induction with sevoflurane. [5][6][7][8][9] Similarly, induction with titrating dose requires less propofol and produces more stable hemodynamic in comparison to standard bolus dose injection. [10] In our study, induction with Sevoflurane was significantly fast in comparison to propofol (53.33±17.29sec vs. 72.27±25.15 sec) , which is similar to that reported in a study done by Philip K. et al (56±4 sec vs.92±12 sec).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Inhalational Vital Capacity Induction with Sevoflurane to Intravenous Induction with Propofol

Adhikari

Lakhe

2020

Nep J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Intravenous propofol is commonly used for induction of general anesthesia because it is smooth and rapid. Inhalational induction method is used in limited situations like absence of venous access and difficult intubation. Sevoflurane also produces rapid induction comparable to propofol. We conducted this study to compare induction time and quality of sevoflurane with that of propofol. Methods:Total 102 patient undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery were divided into Group S and Group P with 51 patient in each group. In group S patient were induced with Sevoflurane 8% via vital capacity induction method. In group P, patients were induced with injection propofol 1% with titrating dose. Induction time, hemodynamic changes and complications during induction, patient satisfaction and cost of induction were compared. Results: Induction was rapid in Group S (53.33±17.29s) compared to Group P (72.27±25.15s) (p=0.01). The heart rate and mean arterial pressure were stable in both groups upto one minute after induction. Hypotension occurred more in Group P than in Group S (47.05%vs.37.25%).Cough (9.80 %vs.5.88%) and excessive secretions (5.88%vs.0%) were common in Group S while apnea (3.92%vs5.88%) and involuntary movements(17.64% vs. 27.45%) were common in Group P. Patient satisfaction score was high in both the groups. Cost of induction was cheaper in Group S compared with Group P (1.6±0.54 $vs.1.9±0.43$). Conclusions: Vital capacity induction with 8% sevoflurane has rapid induction and cheaper as compared to intravenous induction with propofol in a titrating dose. Hemodynamic changes and complications were comparable in both the groups.

show abstract

Comparison of the Single Breath Vital Capacity Technique with the Tidal Volume Technique

Cited by 2 publications

References 11 publications

Comparison of vital capacity rapid inhalation and tidal ventilation induction with sevoflurane in adults

Comparison of vital capacity rapid inhalation and tidal ventilation induction with sevoflurane in adults

Comparison of Inhalational Vital Capacity Induction with Sevoflurane to Intravenous Induction with Propofol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About