Dataset Information

Respiratory System Mechanics During Low Versus High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Open Abdominal Surgery: A Substudy of PROVHILO Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In the 2014 PROtective Ventilation using HIgh versus LOw positive end-expiratory pressure (PROVHILO) trial, intraoperative low tidal volume ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP = 12 cm H2O) and lung recruitment maneuvers did not decrease postoperative pulmonary complications when compared to low PEEP (0-2 cm H2O) approach without recruitment breaths. However, effects of intraoperative PEEP on lung compliance remain poorly understood. We hypothesized that higher PEEP leads to a dominance of intratidal overdistension, whereas lower PEEP results in intratidal recruitment/derecruitment (R/D). To test our hypothesis, we used the volume-dependent elastance index %E2, a respiratory parameter that allows for noninvasive and radiation-free assessment of dominant overdistension and intratidal R/D. We compared the incidence of intratidal R/D, linear expansion, and overdistension by means of %E2 in a subset of the PROVHILO cohort. METHODS:In 36 patients from 2 participating centers of the PROVHILO trial, we calculated respiratory system elastance (E), resistance (R), and %E2, a surrogate parameter for intratidal overdistension (%E2 > 30%) and R/D (%E2 < 0%). To test the main hypothesis, we compared the incidence of intratidal overdistension (primary end point) and R/D in higher and lower PEEP groups, as measured by %E2. RESULTS:E was increased in the lower compared to higher PEEP group (18.6 [16…22] vs 13.4 [11.0…17.0] cm H2O·L; P < .01). %E2 was reduced in the lower PEEP group compared to higher PEEP (-15.4 [-28.0…6.5] vs 6.2 [-0.8…14.0] %; P < .05). Intratidal R/D was increased in the lower PEEP group (61% vs 22%; P = .037). The incidence of intratidal overdistension did not differ significantly between groups (6%). CONCLUSIONS:During mechanical ventilation with protective tidal volumes in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery, lung recruitment followed by PEEP of 12 cm H2O decreased the incidence of intratidal R/D and did not worsen overdistension, when compared to PEEP ?2 cm H2O.

SUBMITTER: D'Antini D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6696998 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Respiratory System Mechanics During Low Versus High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Open Abdominal Surgery: A Substudy of PROVHILO Randomized Controlled Trial.

D'Antini Davide D Huhle Robert R Herrmann Jacob J Sulemanji Demet S DS Oto Jun J Raimondo Pasquale P Mirabella Lucia L Hemmes Sabrine N T SNT Schultz Marcus J MJ Pelosi Paolo P Kaczka David W DW Vidal Melo Marcos Francisco MF Gama de Abreu Marcelo M Cinnella Gilda G

Anesthesia and analgesia 20180101 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the 2014 PROtective Ventilation using HIgh versus LOw positive end-expiratory pressure (PROVHILO) trial, intraoperative low tidal volume ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP = 12 cm H2O) and lung recruitment maneuvers did not decrease postoperative pulmonary complications when compared to low PEEP (0-2 cm H2O) approach without recruitment breaths. However, effects of intraoperative PEEP on lung compliance remain poorly understood. We hypothesized tha ...[more]

PMID: 28632529

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe role of positive end-expiratory pressure in mechanical ventilation during general anaesthesia for surgery remains uncertain. Levels of pressure higher than 0 cm H2O might protect against postoperative pulmonary complications but could also cause intraoperative circulatory depression and lung injury from overdistension. We tested the hypothesis that a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure with recruitment manoeuvres protects against postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at risk of complications who are receiving mechanical ventilation with low tidal volumes during general anaesthesia for open abdominal surgery.MethodsIn this randomised controlled trial at 30 centres in Europe and North and South America, we recruited 900 patients at risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were planned for open abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia and ventilation at tidal volumes of 8 mL/kg. We randomly allocated patients to either a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure (12 cm H2O) with recruitment manoeuvres (higher PEEP group) or a low level of pressure (≤2 cm H2O) without recruitment manoeuvres (lower PEEP group). We used a centralised computer-generated randomisation system. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to the intervention. Primary endpoint was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications by postoperative day 5. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. The study is registered at Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN70332574.FindingsFrom February, 2011, to January, 2013, 447 patients were randomly allocated to the higher PEEP group and 453 to the lower PEEP group. Six patients were excluded from the analysis, four because they withdrew consent and two for violation of inclusion criteria. Median levels of positive end-expiratory pressure were 12 cm H2O (IQR 12-12) in the higher PEEP group and 2 cm H2O (0-2) in the lower PEEP group. Postoperative pulmonary complications were reported in 174 (40%) of 445 patients in the higher PEEP group versus 172 (39%) of 449 patients in the lower PEEP group (relative risk 1·01; 95% CI 0·86-1·20; p=0·86). Compared with patients in the lower PEEP group, those in the higher PEEP group developed intraoperative hypotension and needed more vasoactive drugs.InterpretationA strategy with a high level of positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment manoeuvres during open abdominal surgery does not protect against postoperative pulmonary complications. An intraoperative protective ventilation strategy should include a low tidal volume and low positive end-expiratory pressure, without recruitment manoeuvres.FundingAcademic Medical Center (Amsterdam, Netherlands), European Society of Anaesthesiology.

Project description:Background: The pathophysiological effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on respiratory mechanics, lung recruitment, and intracranial pressure (ICP) in acute brain-injured patients have not been completely elucidated. The primary aim of this study was to assess the effects of PEEP augmentation on respiratory mechanics, quantitative computed lung tomography (qCT) findings, and its relationship with ICP modifications. Secondary aims included the assessment of the correlations between different factors (respiratory mechanics and qCT features) with the changes of ICP and how these factors at baseline may predict ICP response after greater PEEP levels. Methods: A prospective, observational study included mechanically ventilated patients with acute brain injury requiring invasive ICP and who underwent two-PEEP levels lung CT scan. Respiratory system compliance (Crs), arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), mean arterial pressure (MAP), data from qCT and ICP were obtained at PEEP 5 and 15 cmH2O. Results: Sixteen examinations (double PEEP lung CT and neuromonitoring) in 15 patients were analyzed. The median age of the patients was 54 years (interquartile range, IQR = 39-65) and 53% were men. The median Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) at intensive care unit (ICU) admission was 8 (IQR = 3-12). Median alveolar recruitment was 2.5% of total lung weight (-1.5 to 4.7). PEEP from 5 to 15 cmH2O increased ICP [median values from 14.0 (11.2-17.5) to 23.5 (19.5-26.8) mmHg, p < 0.001, respectively]. The amount of recruited lung tissue on CT was inversely correlated with the change (Δ) in ICP (rho = -0.78; p = 0.0006). Additionally, ΔCrs (rho = -0.77, p = 0.008), ΔPaCO2 (rho = 0.81, p = 0.0003), and ΔMAP (rho = -0.64, p = 0.009) were correlated with ΔICP. Baseline Crs was not predictive of ICP response to PEEP. Conclusions: The main factors associated with increased ICP after PEEP augmentation included reduced Crs, lower MAP and lung recruitment, and increased PaCO2, but none of these factors was able to predict, at baseline, ICP response to PEEP. To assess the potential benefits of increased PEEP in patients with acute brain injury, hemodynamic status, respiratory mechanics, and lung morphology should be taken into account.

Project description:IntroductionIntra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) causes atelectasis, reduces lung volumes and increases respiratory system elastance. Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in the setting of IAH and healthy lungs improves lung volumes but not oxygenation. However, critically ill patients with IAH often suffer from acute lung injury (ALI). This study, therefore, examined the respiratory and cardiac effects of positive end-expiratory pressure in an animal model of IAH, with sick lungs.MethodsNine pigs were anesthetized and ventilated (48 +/- 6 kg). Lung injury was induced with oleic acid. Three levels of intra-abdominal pressure (baseline, 18, and 22 mmHg) were randomly generated. At each level of intra-abdominal pressure, three levels of PEEP were randomly applied: baseline (5 cmH2O), moderate (0.5 × intra-abdominal pressure), and high (1.0 × intra-abdominal pressure). We measured end-expiratory lung volumes, arterial oxygen levels, respiratory mechanics, and cardiac output 10 minutes after each new IAP and PEEP setting.ResultsAt baseline PEEP, IAH (22 mmHg) decreased oxygen levels (-55%, P <0.001) and end-expiratory lung volumes (-45%, P = 0.007). At IAP of 22 mmHg, moderate and high PEEP increased oxygen levels (+60%, P = 0.04 and +162%, P <0.001) and end-expiratory lung volume (+44%, P = 0.02 and +279%, P <0.001) and high PEEP reduced cardiac output (-30%, P = 0.04). Shunt and dead-space fraction inversely correlated with oxygen levels and end-expiratory lung volumes. In the presence of IAH, lung, chest wall and respiratory system elastance increased. Subsequently, PEEP decreased respiratory system elastance by decreasing chest wall elastance.ConclusionsIn a porcine sick lung model of IAH, PEEP matched to intra-abdominal pressure led to increased lung volumes and oxygenation and decreased chest wall elastance shunt and dead-space fraction. High PEEP decreased cardiac output. The study shows that lung injury influences the effects of IAH and PEEP on oxygenation and respiratory mechanics. Our findings support the application of PEEP in the setting of acute lung injury and IAH.

Project description:BackgroundWe hypothesized that as CARDS may present different pathophysiological features than classic ARDS, the application of high levels of end-expiratory pressure is questionable. Our first aim was to investigate the effects of 5-15 cmH2O of PEEP on partitioned respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and dead space; secondly, we investigated whether respiratory system compliance and severity of hypoxemia could affect the response to PEEP on partitioned respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and dead space, dividing the population according to the median value of respiratory system compliance and oxygenation. Thirdly, we explored the effects of an additional PEEP selected according to the Empirical PEEP-FiO2 table of the EPVent-2 study on partitioned respiratory mechanics and gas exchange in a subgroup of patients.MethodsSixty-one paralyzed mechanically ventilated patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled (age 60 [54-67] years, PaO2/FiO2 113 [79-158] mmHg and PEEP 10 [10-10] cmH2O). Keeping constant tidal volume, respiratory rate and oxygen fraction, two PEEP levels (5 and 15 cmH2O) were selected. In a subgroup of patients an additional PEEP level was applied according to an Empirical PEEP-FiO2 table (empirical PEEP). At each PEEP level gas exchange, partitioned lung mechanics and hemodynamic were collected.ResultsAt 15 cmH2O of PEEP the lung elastance, lung stress and mechanical power were higher compared to 5 cmH2O. The PaO2/FiO2, arterial carbon dioxide and ventilatory ratio increased at 15 cmH2O of PEEP. The arterial-venous oxygen difference and central venous saturation were higher at 15 cmH2O of PEEP. Both the mechanics and gas exchange variables significantly increased although with high heterogeneity. By increasing the PEEP from 5 to 15 cmH2O, the changes in partitioned respiratory mechanics and mechanical power were not related to hypoxemia or respiratory compliance. The empirical PEEP was 18 ± 1 cmH2O. The empirical PEEP significantly increased the PaO2/FiO2 but also driving pressure, lung elastance, lung stress and mechanical power compared to 15 cmH2O of PEEP.ConclusionsIn COVID-19 ARDS during the early phase the effects of raising PEEP are highly variable and cannot easily be predicted by respiratory system characteristics, because of the heterogeneity of the disease.

Project description:BackgroundIn acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients, it has recently been proposed to set positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) by targeting end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure. This approach, which relies on the measurement of absolute esophageal pressure (Pes), has been used in supine position (SP) and has not been investigated in prone position (PP). Our purposes were to assess Pes-guided strategy to set PEEP in SP and in PP as compared with a PEEP/FIO2 table and to explore the early (1 h) and late (16 h) effects of PP on lung and chest wall mechanics.ResultsWe performed a prospective, physiologic study in two ICUs in university hospitals on ARDS patients with PaO2/FIO2 <?150 mmHg. End-expiratory Pes (Pes,ee) was measured in static (zero flow) condition. Patients received PEEP set according to a PEEP/FIO2 table then according to the Pes-guided strategy targeting a positive (3?±?2 cmH2O) static end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure in SP. Then, patients were turned to PP and received same amount of PEEP from PEEP/FIO2 table then Pes-guided strategy. Respiratory mechanics, oxygenation and end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) were measured after 1 h of each PEEP in each position. For the rest of the 16-h PP session, patients were randomly allocated to either PEEP strategy with measurements done at the end. Thirty-eight ARDS patients (27 male), mean?±?SD age 63?±?13 years, were included. There were 33 primary ARDS and 26 moderate ARDS. PaO2/FIO2 ratio was 120?±?23 mmHg. At same PEEP/FIO2 table-related PEEP, Pes,ee averaged 9?±?4 cmH2O in both SP and PP (P?=?0.88). With PEEP/FIO2 table and Pes-guided strategy, PEEP was 10?±?2 versus 12?±?4 cmH2O in SP and 10?±?2 versus 12?±?5 cmH2O in PP (PEEP strategy effect P?=?0.05, position effect P?=?0.96, interaction P?=?0.96). With the Pes-guided strategy, chest wall elastance increased regardless of position. Lung elastance and transpulmonary driving pressure decreased in PP, with no effect of PEEP strategy. Both PP and Pes-guided strategy improved oxygenation without interaction. EELV did not change with PEEP strategy. At the end of PP session, respiratory mechanics did not vary but EELV and PaO2/FIO2 increased while PaCO2 decreased.ConclusionsThere was no impact of PP on Pes measurements. PP had an immediate improvement effect on lung mechanics and a late lung recruitment effect independent of PEEP strategy.

Dataset Information

Respiratory System Mechanics During Low Versus High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Open Abdominal Surgery: A Substudy of PROVHILO Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Respiratory System Mechanics During Low Versus High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Open Abdominal Surgery: A Substudy of PROVHILO Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets