Changes in diaphragmatic excursion and lung compliance during gynaecologic surgery: open laparotomy versus laparoscopy—a prospective observational study

6Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study compared the effects of open versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on intraoperative diaphragmatic excursion and lung compliance. We enrolled 20 women per group; Group O’s members underwent open radical hysterectomy, while Group L’s members underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Diaphragmatic excursion was measured by assessing tidal ventilation using M-mode ultrasonography before intubation (T0), after intubation with mechanical ventilation (T1), 90 min after incision (T2), and at the end of the operation with recovery of muscle relaxation (T3). Peak inspiratory pressure and static lung compliance were measured using an anaesthesia machine combined with a ventilator. Diaphragmatic excursion was significantly lower in Group L than in Group O at T2 (5.3 ± 1.7 mm vs. 7.7 ± 2.0 mm, P < 0.001) and T3 (8.4 ± 1.9 vs. 10.4 ± 2.4, P = 0.011). Impaired diaphragmatic excursion at T3 (< 10 mm under mechanical ventilation) occurred in 15 patients (83.3%) in Group L and seven (38.9%) in Group O (P = 0.006). Changes over time in peak inspiratory pressure and static lung compliance differed significantly between the two groups (P < 0.001 each). Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy decreased diaphragmatic excursion and static lung compliance significantly more than open radical hysterectomy. Korean clinical trial number: Korean Clinical Trials Registry (KCT0004477) (Date of registration: November 18 2019) (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01_en.jsp?seq=14963&ltype=&rtype=).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, K., Kim, K. S., Jeon, A. R., Park, J. Y., & Choi, W. J. (2020). Changes in diaphragmatic excursion and lung compliance during gynaecologic surgery: open laparotomy versus laparoscopy—a prospective observational study. Scientific Reports, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78375-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free