Correspondence  |   January 2017
In Reply
Author Notes
  • Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, and Department of Medicine, Institute of Biomedical Science and Technology, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea (S.-H.K.). yshkim75@daum.net
  • (Accepted for publication October 5, 2016.)
    (Accepted for publication October 5, 2016.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   January 2017
In Reply
Anesthesiology 1 2017, Vol.126, 196. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001412
Anesthesiology 1 2017, Vol.126, 196. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001412
We thank Naik et al. for their comments on and questions regarding our study.1  They first asked whether more detailed information about the operation is necessary to identify intraoperative surgical bleeding because the degree of invasiveness of the procedure could be associated with surgical bleeding as reported by Mirza et al.2  We agree with them. In our study, one surgical team performed all of the surgeries to ensure procedural consistency; moreover, patients who had previous spine surgery were excluded from the study. In addition, as they commented, we used the Spine Surgery Invasiveness Index to compare the consistency of the surgical procedure between the two groups and found no difference (9.0 [9.0 to 12.0] in the pressure-controlled ventilation group vs. 9.0 [9.0 to 10.5] in the volume-controlled ventilation group; P = 0.824). Therefore, the degree of invasiveness of the surgical procedure in the two groups was similar, and its effect on the results could be eliminated.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large