Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41625747›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in medicine2025

Effects of different ventilation modes on intra-abdominal pressure and postoperative nausea and vomiting during anesthesia: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial.

Jing Li, Huicong Hu, Li Zhou, Xin Yan, Yaping Lu

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jing Li *Anaesthesiology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Huicong Hu *Anaesthesiology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Li Zhou *Anaesthesiology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Xin YanDepartment of Anesthesiology, HongHui Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Yaping LuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The First Hospital of Jiaxing, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objectives: Improper mask ventilation during anesthesia induction can inject air into the stomach, leading to gastric distension and elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), thereby increasing the risk of reflux and pulmonary aspiration. This single-blind randomized controlled trial compared the effects of three mask ventilation modes-manual ventilation (MV), pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), and volume-controlled ventilation (VCV)-on IAP during the induction period, and preliminarily observed the dynamic changes of IAP after endotracheal intubation and spontaneous breathing recovery, as well as the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in paralyzed patients. We hypothesized that there are differences in the effects of the three mask ventilation modes on IAP during the induction period: PCV may cause less disturbance to IAP than other modes due to its stable pressure control and adjustable tidal volume; meanwhile, IAP will show dynamic changes during the transition from mask ventilation to endotracheal intubation and after the recovery of spontaneous breathing. This hypothesis is based on the physiological mechanism that airway pressure transmission, thoracic-abdominal pressure gradient changes, and gastric distension during mask ventilation may affect IAP. Materials and methods: A total of 152 participants undergoing laparoscopic surgery were randomized into three ventilation groups, with airway pressure limited to 15 cmH₂O and tidal volume set at 6-8 mL/kg. IAP was measured indirectly via intravesical pressure. The primary outcome was the change in IAP at T0 (before induction) and T1 (after induction of anesthetics) during the mask ventilation period. The secondary outcomes included IAP at T2 (after tracheal intubation) and T3 (24 h after surgery), the incidence of gastric insufflation at T2, the antral cross-sectional area (CSA) at T0 and T2, the incidence and severity of PONV at T3, and hemodynamic and respiratory parameters at each time point. Results: IAP decreased in all three groups with no significant intergroup differences. However, within the VCV group, patients with gastric insufflation (GI+) showed higher IAP than those without (GI-) ( Conclusion: Although all three ventilation modes reduced IAP comparably during the mask ventilation period of anesthesia induction, gastric insufflation was associated with increased IAP within the VCV group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of gastric insufflation or IAP among the three ventilation modes. However, considering that the PCV group had more stable tidal volume delivery and lower PaCO₂, it may have potential advantages in maintaining respiratory stability during the induction period, which needs to be verified by further studies with larger sample sizes. Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=208066, identifier (ChiCTR2300076444).

Indexed as

facemask ventilationgastric insufflationintra-abdominal pressurepostoperative nausea and vomitingvolume-controlled ventilation

Identifiers

PMID41625747
PMCPMC12855477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.