Dataset Information

Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on intraoperative core temperature in patients undergoing posterior spine surgery: prospective randomised trial.

ABSTRACT: Objective Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) causes carotid baroreceptor unloading, which leads to thermoregulatory peripheral vasoconstriction. However, the effects of PEEP on intraoperative thermoregulation in the prone position remain unknown. Methods Thirty-seven patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position were assigned at random to receive either 10 cmH2O PEEP (Group P) or no PEEP (Group Z). The primary endpoint was core temperature 180 minutes after intubation. Secondary endpoints were delta core temperature (difference in core temperature between 180 minutes and immediately after tracheal intubation), incidence of intraoperative hypothermia (core temperature of <36°C), and peripheral vasoconstriction-related data. Results The median [interquartile range] core temperature 180 minutes after intubation was 36.1°C [35.9°C-36.2°C] and 36.0°C [35.9°C-36.4°C] in Groups Z and P, respectively. The delta core temperature and incidences of intraoperative hypothermia and peripheral vasoconstriction were not significantly different between the two groups. The peripheral vasoconstriction threshold (36.2°C±0.5°C vs. 36.7°C±0.6°C) was lower and the onset of peripheral vasoconstriction (66 [60-129] vs. 38 [28-70] minutes) was slower in Group Z than in Group P. Conclusions Intraoperative PEEP did not reduce the core temperature decrease in the prone position, although it resulted in an earlier onset and higher threshold of peripheral vasoconstriction.

SUBMITTER: Seo H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5972243 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on intraoperative core temperature in patients undergoing posterior spine surgery: prospective randomised trial.

Seo Hyungseok H Do Son Je J Lee Hyung-Chul HC Oh Hyung-Min HM Jung Chul-Woo CW Park Hee-Pyoung HP

The Journal of international medical research 20171109 3

Objective Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) causes carotid baroreceptor unloading, which leads to thermoregulatory peripheral vasoconstriction. However, the effects of PEEP on intraoperative thermoregulation in the prone position remain unknown. Methods Thirty-seven patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position were assigned at random to receive either 10 cmH<sub>2</sub>O PEEP (Group P) or no PEEP (Group Z). The primary endpoint was core temperature 180 minutes after intubation. ...[more]

PMID: 29119875

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPositive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been demonstrated to decrease ventilator-induced lung injury in patients under mechanical ventilation (MV) for acute respiratory failure. Recently, some studies have proposed some beneficial effects of PEEP in ventilated patients without lung injury. The influence of PEEP on respiratory mechanics in children is not well known. Our aim was to determine the effects on respiratory mechanics of setting PEEP at 5 cmH2O in anesthetized healthy children.MethodsPatients younger than 15 years old without history of lung injury scheduled for elective surgery gave informed consent and were enrolled in the study. After usual care for general anesthesia, patients were placed on volume controlled MV. Two sets of respiratory mechanics studies were performed using inspiratory and expiratory breath hold, with PEEP 0 and 5 cmH2O. The maximum inspiratory and expiratory flow (QI and QE) as well as peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), plateau pressure (PPL) and total PEEP (tPEEP) were measured. Respiratory system compliance (CRS), inspiratory and expiratory resistances (RawI and RawE) and time constants (KTI and KTE) were calculated. Data were expressed as median and interquartile range (IQR). Wilcoxon sign test and Spearman's analysis were used. Significance was set at P < 0.05.ResultsWe included 30 patients, median age 39 (15-61.3) months old, 60% male. When PEEP increased, PIP increased from 12 (11,14) to 15.5 (14,18), and CRS increased from 0.9 (0.9,1.2) to 1.2 (0.9,1.4) mL·kg- 1·cmH2O- 1; additionally, when PEEP increased, driving pressure decreased from 6.8 (5.9,8.1) to 5.8 (4.7,7.1) cmH2O, and QE decreased from 13.8 (11.8,18.7) to 11.7 (9.1,13.5) L·min- 1 (all P < 0.01). There were no significant changes in resistance and QI.ConclusionsAnalysis of respiratory mechanics in anesthetized healthy children shows that PEEP at 5 cmH2O places the respiratory system in a better position in the P/V curve. A better understanding of lung mechanics may lead to changes in the traditional ventilatory approach, limiting injury associated with MV.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In ARDS patients, changes in respiratory mechanical properties and ventilatory settings can cause incomplete lung deflation at end-expiration. Both can promote dynamic hyperinflation and intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). The aim of this study was to investigate, in a large population of ARDS patients, the presence of intrinsic PEEP, possible associated factors (patients' characteristics and ventilator settings), and the effects of two different external PEEP levels on the intrinsic PEEP. METHODS:We made a secondary analysis of published data. Patients were ventilated with a tidal volume of 6-8?mL/kg of predicted body weight, sedated, and paralyzed. After a recruitment maneuver, a PEEP trial was run at 5 and 15 cmH2O, and partitioned mechanics measurements were collected after 20?min of stabilization. Lung computed tomography scans were taken at 5 and 45 cmH2O. Patients were classified into two groups according to whether or not they had intrinsic PEEP at the end of an expiratory pause. RESULTS:We enrolled 217 sedated, paralyzed patients: 87 (40%) had intrinsic PEEP with a median of 1.1 [1.0-2.3] cmH2O at 5 cmH2O of PEEP. The intrinsic PEEP significantly decreased with higher PEEP (1.1 [1.0-2.3] vs 0.6 [0.0-1.0] cmH2O; p?<?0.001). The applied tidal volume was significantly lower (480 [430-540] vs 520 [445-600] mL at 5 cmH2O of PEEP; 480 [430-540] vs 510 [430-590] mL at 15 cmH2O) in patients with intrinsic PEEP, while the respiratory rate was significantly higher (18 [15-20] vs 15 [13-19] bpm at 5 cmH2O of PEEP; 18 [15-20] vs 15 [13-19] bpm at 15 cmH2O). At both PEEP levels, the total airway resistance and compliance of the respiratory system were not different in patients with and without intrinsic PEEP. The total lung gas volume and lung recruitability were also not different between patients with and without intrinsic PEEP (respectively 961 [701-1535] vs 973 [659-1433] mL and 15 [0-32] % vs 22 [0-36] %). CONCLUSIONS:In sedated, paralyzed ARDS patients without a known obstructive disease, the amount of intrinsic PEEP during lung-protective ventilation is negligible and does not influence respiratory mechanical properties.

Dataset Information

Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on intraoperative core temperature in patients undergoing posterior spine surgery: prospective randomised trial.

Publications

Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on intraoperative core temperature in patients undergoing posterior spine surgery: prospective randomised trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets