Comparison of AutoFlow and conventional volume-controlled ventilation using LMA ProSeal during gynecological laparoscopic surgery

Comparison of AutoFlow and conventional volume-controlled ventilation using LMA ProSeal during gynecological laparoscopic surgery - Evaluation of AutoFlow ventilation mode using LMA ProSeal during gynecological laparoscopy

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000023173

Enrollment

Registered

2016-07-14

Start date

2016-07-14

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Patients undergo gynecological laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia

Interventions

Conventional volume-controlled ventilation Volume-controlled ventilation using AutoFlow mode

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

Female

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients undergo gynecological laparoscopic surgery

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients considered inadequate for intraoperative airway management using LMA ProSeal

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Peak airway pressure during pneumoperitoneum and trendelenburg position	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Leak from LMA ProSeal during pneumoperitoneum and trendelenburg position Peak airway pressure before pneumoperitoneum Peak airway pressure shortly after initiation of pneumoperitoneum	—

Countries

Japan

Contacts

Public ContactToshiyuki Nakanishi

JCHO Tokuyama Central Hospital Department of Anesthesiology

nakanishi.anest@gmail.com0834-28-4411

Outcome results

None listed

Source: JPRN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 3, 2026