Dataset Information

Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation.

ABSTRACT: During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (?P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP_INCREMENTAL) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEP_DECREMENTAL). In this randomized trial, we compared the physiological effects of these two PEEP titration strategies on respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and gas exchange. Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in OLV were randomly assigned to a PEEP_INCREMENTAL or PEEP_DECREMENTAL strategy to match the lowest ?P. In the PEEP_INCREMENTAL group, PEEP was stepwise titrated from ZEEP up to 16 cm H₂O, whereas in the PEEP_DECREMENTAL group PEEP was decrementally titrated, starting from 16 cm H₂O, immediately after a lung recruiting manoeuvre. Respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and blood gas analyses were recorded at baseline, after PEEP titration and at the end of surgery. Sixty patients were included in the study. After PEEP titration, shunt decreased similarly in both groups, from 50 [39-55]% to 35 [28-42]% in the PEEP_INCREMENTAL and from 45 [37-58]% to 33 [25-45]% in the PEEP_DECREMENTAL group (both p?DECREMENTAL than in the PEEP_INCREMENTAL group (8 [7-11] vs 10 [9-11] cm H₂O; p?=?0.03). In the PEEP_DECREMENTAL group the PaO₂/ FIO₂ ratio increased significantly after intervention (from 140 [99-176] to 186 [152-243], p?INCREMENTAL and the PEEP_DECREMENTAL strategies were able to decrease intraoperative shunt, but only PEEP_DECREMENTAL improved oxygenation and lowered intraoperative ?P.Clinical trial number NCT03635281; August 2018; "retrospectively registered".

SUBMITTER: Spadaro S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7439797 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation.

Spadaro Savino S Grasso Salvatore S Karbing Dan Stieper DS Santoro Giuseppe G Cavallesco Giorgio G Maniscalco Pio P Murgolo Francesca F Di Mussi Rosa R Ragazzi Riccardo R Rees Stephen Edward SE Volta Carlo Alberto CA Fogagnolo Alberto A

Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 20200820 5

During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (∆P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP<sub>INCREMENTAL</sub>) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEP<sub>DECREMENTAL</sub>). In this randomized trial, we compared the physiological effects of these two PEEP titration strategies on ...[more]

PMID: 32816177

Similar Datasets

Project description:The positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), since its introduction in the treatment of acute respiratory failure, up to the 1980s was uniquely aimed to provide a viable oxygenation. Since the first application, a large debate about the criteria for selecting the PEEP levels arose within the scientific community. Lung mechanics, oxygen transport, venous admixture thresholds were all proposed, leading to PEEP recommendations from 5 up to 25 cmH2O. Throughout this period, the main concern was the hemodynamics. This paradigm changed during the 1980s after the wide acceptance of atelectrauma as one of the leading causes of ventilator induced lung injury. Accordingly, the PEEP aim shifted from oxygenation to lung protection. In this framework, the prevention of lung opening and closing became an almost unquestioned dogma. Consequently, as PEEP keeps open the pulmonary units opened during the previous inspiratory phase, new methods were designed to identify the 'optimal' PEEP during the expiratory phase. The open lung approach requires that every collapsed unit potentially openable is opened and maintained open. The methods to assess the recruitment are based on imaging (computed tomography, electric impedance tomography, ultrasound) or mechanically-driven gas exchange modifications. All the latest assume that whatever change in respiratory system compliance is due to changes in lung compliance, which in turn is uniquely function of the recruitment. Comparative studies, however, showed that the only possible approach to measure the amount of collapsed tissue regaining inflation is the CT scan. In fact, all the other methods estimate as recruitment the gas entry in pulmonary units already open at lower PEEP, but increasing their compliance at higher PEEP. Since higher PEEP is usually more indicated (also for oxygenation) when the recruitability is higher, as occurs with increasing severity, a meaningful PEEP selection requires the assessment of recruitment. The Berlin definition may help in this assessment.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) may result in longer duration of in-hospital stay and even mortality. Both thoracic surgery and intraoperative mechanical ventilation settings add considerably to the risk of PPC. It is unclear if one-lung ventilation (OLV) for thoracic surgery with a strategy of intraoperative high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM) reduces PPC, compared to low PEEP without RM.MethodsPROTHOR is an international, multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, two-arm trial initiated by investigators of the PROtective VEntilation NETwork. In total, 2378 patients will be randomly assigned to one of two different intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older, scheduled for open thoracic or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery under general anesthesia requiring OLV, with a maximal body mass index of 35 kg/m2, and a planned duration of surgery of more than 60 min. Further, the expected duration of OLV shall be longer than two-lung ventilation, and lung separation is planned with a double lumen tube. Patients will be randomly assigned to PEEP of 10 cmH2O with lung RM, or PEEP of 5 cmH2O without RM. During two-lung ventilation tidal volume is set at 7 mL/kg predicted body weight and, during OLV, it will be decreased to 5 mL/kg. The occurrence of PPC will be recorded as a collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint.DiscussionPROTHOR is the first randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with OLV that is adequately powered to compare the effects of intraoperative high PEEP with RM versus low PEEP without RM on PPC. The results of the PROTHOR trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to set intraoperative PEEP during protective ventilation for OLV in thoracic surgery.Trial registrationThe trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02963025 ) on 15 November 2016.

Project description:Weaning patients from mechanical ventilation (MV) is a critical and resource intensive process in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) that impacts patient outcomes and healthcare expenses. Weaning methods vary widely among providers. Prolonged MV is associated with adverse events and higher healthcare expenses. Predicting weaning readiness is a non-trivial process in which the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), a crucial component of MV, has potential to be indicative but has not yet been used as the target. We aimed to predict successful weaning from mechanical ventilation by targeting changes in the PEEP-level using a supervised machine learning model. This retrospective study included 12,153 mechanically ventilated patients from Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-IV) and eICU collaborative research database (eICU-CRD). Two machine learning models (Extreme Gradient Boosting and Logistic Regression) were developed using a continuous PEEP reduction as target. The data is splitted into 80% as training set and 20% as test set. The model's predictive performance was reported using 95% confidence interval (CI), based on evaluation metrics such as area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), F1-Score, Recall, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). The model's descriptive performance was reported as the variable ranking using SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) algorithm. The best model achieved an AUROC of 0.84 (95% CI 0.83-0.85) and an AUPRC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.67-0.70) in predicting successful weaning based on the PEEP reduction. The model demonstrated a Recall of 0.85 (95% CI 0.84-0.86), F1-score of 0.86 (95% CI 0.85-0.87), PPV of 0.87 (95% CI 0.86-0.88), and NPV of 0.64 (95% CI 0.63-0.66). Most of the variables that SHAP algorithm ranked to be important correspond with clinical intuition, such as duration of MV, oxygen saturation (SaO2), PEEP, and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) components. This study demonstrates the potential application of machine learning in predicting successful weaning from MV based on continuous PEEP reduction. The model's high PPV and moderate NPV suggest that it could be a useful tool to assist clinicians in making decisions regarding ventilator management.

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.

Dataset Information

Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation.

Publications

Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets