Search

Background: It is uncertain whether the association of the intraoperative driving pressure (ΔP) with postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) depends on the surgical approach during abdominal surgery. Our primary objective was to determine and compare the association of time–weighted average ΔP (ΔPTW) with PPCs. We also tested the association of ΔPTW with intraoperative adverse events. Methods: Posthoc retrospective propensity score–weighted cohort analysis of patients undergoing open or closed abdominal surgery in the 'Local ASsessment of Ventilatory management during General Anaesthesia for Surgery' (LAS VEGAS) study, that included patients in 146 hospitals across 29 countries. The primary endpoint was a composite of PPCs. The secondary endpoint was a composite of intraoperative adverse events. Results: The analysis included 1128 and 906 patients undergoing open or closed abdominal surgery, respectively. The PPC rate was 5%. ΔP was lower in open abdominal surgery patients, but ΔPTW was not different between groups. The association of ΔPTW with PPCs was significant in both groups and had a higher risk ratio in closed compared to open abdominal surgery patients (1.11 [95%CI 1.10 to 1.20], P < 0.001 versus 1.05 [95%CI 1.05 to 1.05], P < 0.001; risk difference 0.05 [95%CI 0.04 to 0.06], P < 0.001). The association of ΔPTW with intraoperative adverse events was also significant in both groups but had higher odds ratio in closed compared to open abdominal surgery patients (1.13 [95%CI 1.12– to 1.14], P < 0.001 versus 1.07 [95%CI 1.05 to 1.10], P < 0.001; risk difference 0.05 [95%CI 0.030.07], P < 0.001). Conclusions: ΔP is associated with PPC and intraoperative adverse events in abdominal surgery, both in open and closed abdominal surgery. Trial registration: LAS VEGAS was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (trial identifier NCT01601223). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intraoperative driving pressure (ΔP) is associated with development of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC). When tidal volume (VT) is kept constant, ΔP may change according to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced changes in lung aeration. ΔP may decrease if PEEP leads to a recruitment of collapsed lung tissue but will increase if PEEP mainly causes pulmonary overdistension. This study tests the hypothesis that individualized high PEEP, when compared to fixed low PEEP, protects against PPC in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery.Methods: The "Driving prESsure durIng GeNeral AnesThesIa for Open abdomiNal surgery trial" (DESIGNATION) is an international, multicenter, two-group, double-blind randomized clinical superiority trial. A total of 1468 patients will be randomly assigned to one of the two intraoperative ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged ≥ 18 years and with a body mass index ≤ 40 kg/m2, scheduled for open abdominal surgery and at risk for PPC. Patients either receive an intraoperative ventilation strategy with individualized high PEEP with recruitment maneuvers (RM) ("individualized high PEEP") or one in which PEEP of 5 cm H2O without RM is used ("low PEEP"). In the "individualized high PEEP" group, PEEP is set at the level at which ΔP is lowest. In both groups of the trial, VT is kept at 8 mL/kg predicted body weight. The primary endpoint is the occurrence of PPC, recorded as a collapsed composite of adverse pulmonary events.Discussion: DESIGNATION will be the first randomized clinical trial that is adequately powered to compare the effects of individualized high PEEP with RM versus fixed low PEEP without RM on the occurrence of PPC after open abdominal surgery. The results of DESIGNATION will support anesthesiologists in their decisions regarding PEEP settings during open abdominal surgery.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03884543. Registered on 21 March 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Variable ventilation has been shown to improve pulmonary function and reduce lung damage in different models of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Nevertheless, variable ventilation has not been tested during pneumonia. Theoretically, periodic increases in tidal volume (VT) and airway pressures might worsen the impairment of alveolar barrier function usually seen in pneumonia and could increase bacterial translocation into the bloodstream. We investigated the impact of variable ventilation on lung function and histologic damage, as well as markers of lung inflammation, epithelial and endothelial cell damage, and alveolar stress, and bacterial translocation in experimental pneumonia. Methods: Thirty-two Wistar rats were randomly assigned to receive intratracheal of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) or saline (SAL) (n = 16/group). After 24-h, animals were anesthetized and ventilated for 2 h with either conventional volume-controlled (VCV) or variable volume-controlled ventilation (VV), with mean VT = 6 mL/kg, PEEP = 5cmH2O, and FiO2 = 0.4. During VV, tidal volume varied randomly with a coefficient of variation of 30% and a Gaussian distribution. Additional animals assigned to receive either PA or SAL (n = 8/group) were not ventilated (NV) to serve as controls. Results: In both SAL and PA, VV improved oxygenation and lung elastance compared to VCV. In SAL, VV decreased interleukin (IL)-6 expression compared to VCV (median [interquartile range]: 1.3 [0.3-2.3] vs. 5.3 [3.6-7.0]; p = 0.02) and increased surfactant protein-D expression compared to NV (2.5 [1.9-3.5] vs. 1.2 [0.8-1.2]; p = 0.0005). In PA, compared to VCV, VV reduced perivascular edema (2.5 [2.0-3.75] vs. 6.0 [4.5-6.0]; p < 0.0001), septum neutrophils (2. 0 [1.0-4.0] vs. 5.0 [3.3-6.0]; p = 0.0008), necrotizing vasculitis (3.0 [2.0-5.5] vs. 6.0 [6.0-6.0]; p = 0.0003), and ultrastructural lung damage scores (16 [14-17] vs. 24 [14-27], p < 0.0001). Blood colony-forming-unit (CFU) counts were comparable (7 [0-28] vs. 6 [0-26], p = 0.77). Compared to NV, VCV, but not VV, increased expression amphiregulin, IL-6, and cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant (CINC)-1 (2.1 [1.6-2.5] vs. 0.9 [0.7-1.2], p = 0. 025; 12.3 [7.9-22.0] vs. 0.8 [0.6-1.9], p = 0.006; and 4.4 [2.9-5.6] vs. 0.9 [0.8-1.4], p = 0.003, respectively). Angiopoietin-2 expression was lower in VV compared to NV animals (0.5 [0.3-0.8] vs. 1.3 [1.0-1.5], p = 0.01). Conclusion: In this rat model of pneumonia, VV improved pulmonary function and reduced lung damage as compared to VCV, without increasing bacterial translocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) improve survival and reduce organ failure in cecal ligation and puncture-induced sepsis; however, expanded EPCs may represent an even better approach for vascular repair. To date, no study has compared the effects of non-expanded EPCs (EPC-NEXP) with those of expanded EPCs (EPC-EXP) and mesenchymal stromal cells of human (MSC-HUMAN) and mouse (MSC-MICE) origin in experimental sepsis. One day after cecal ligation and puncture sepsis induction, BALB/c mice were randomized to receive saline, EPC-EXP, EPC-NEXP, MSC-HUMAN or MSC-MICE (1 × 105) intravenously. EPC-EXP, EPC-NEXP, MSC-HUMAN, and MSC-MICE displayed differences in phenotypic characterization. On days 1 and 3, cecal ligation and puncture mice showed decreased survival rate, and increased elastance, diffuse alveolar damage, and levels of interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-α, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet-derived growth factor in lung tissue. EPC-EXP and MSC-HUMAN had reduced elastance, diffuse alveolar damage, and platelet-derived growth factor compared to no-cell treatment. Tumor necrosis factor-α levels decreased in the EPC-EXP, MSC-HUMAN, and MSC-MICE groups. IL-1β levels decreased in the EPC-EXP group, while IL-10 decreased in the MSC-MICE. IL-6 levels decreased both in the EPC-EXP and MSC-MICE groups. Vascular endothelial growth factor levels were reduced regardless of therapy. In conclusion, EPC-EXP and MSC-HUMAN yielded better lung function and reduced histologic damage in septic mice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background General anesthesia usually requires mechanical ventilation, which is traditionally accomplished with constant tidal volumes in volume- or pressure-controlled modes. Experimental studies suggest that the use of variable tidal volumes (variable ventilation) recruits lung tissue, improves pulmonary function and reduces systemic inflammatory response. However, it is currently not known whether patients undergoing open abdominal surgery might benefit from intraoperative variable ventilation. Methods/Design The PROtective VARiable ventilation trial ('PROVAR') is a single center, randomized controlled trial enrolling 50 patients who are planning for open abdominal surgery expected to last longer than 3 hours. PROVAR compares conventional (non-variable) lung protective ventilation (CV) with variable lung protective ventilation (VV) regarding pulmonary function and inflammatory response. The primary endpoint of the study is the forced vital capacity on the first postoperative day. Secondary endpoints include further lung function tests, plasma cytokine levels, spatial distribution of ventilation assessed by means of electrical impedance tomography and postoperative pulmonary complications. Discussion We hypothesize that VV improves lung function and reduces systemic inflammatory response compared to CV in patients receiving mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia for open abdominal surgery longer than 3 hours. PROVAR is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at intra- and postoperative effects of VV on lung function. This study may help to define the role of VV during general anesthesia requiring mechanical ventilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We investigated the effects of intravenous and intratracheal administration of salbutamol on lung morphology and function, expression of ion channels, aquaporin, and markers of inflammation, apoptosis, and alveolar epithelial/endothelial cell damage in experimental pulmonary (p) and extrapulmonary (exp) mild acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: In this prospective randomized controlled experimental study, 56 male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to mild ARDS induced by either intratracheal (n = 28, ARDSp) or intraperitoneal (n = 28, ARDSexp) administration of E. coli lipopolysaccharide. Four animals with no lung injury served as controls (NI). After 24 hours, animals were anesthetized, mechanically ventilated in pressure-controlled mode with low tidal volume (6 mL/kg), and randomly assigned to receive salbutamol (SALB) or saline 0.9% (CTRL), intravenously (i.v., 10 μg/kg/h) or intratracheally (bolus, 25 μg). Salbutamol doses were targeted at an increase of ≈ 20% in heart rate. Hemodynamics, lung mechanics, and arterial blood gases were measured before and after (at 30 and 60 min) salbutamol administration. At the end of the experiment, lungs were extracted for analysis of lung histology and molecular biology analysis. Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation, and fold changes relative to NI, CTRL vs. SALB. Results: The gene expression of ion channels and aquaporin was increased in mild ARDSp, but not ARDSexp. In ARDSp, intravenous salbutamol resulted in higher gene expression of alveolar epithelial sodium channel (0.20 ± 0.07 vs. 0.68 ± 0.24, p < 0.001), aquaporin-1 (0.44 ± 0.09 vs. 0.96 ± 0.12, p < 0.001) aquaporin-3 (0.31 ± 0.12 vs. 0.93 ± 0.20, p < 0.001), and Na-K-ATPase-α (0.39 ± 0.08 vs. 0.92 ± 0.12, p < 0.001), whereas intratracheal salbutamol increased the gene expression of aquaporin-1 (0.46 ± 0.11 vs. 0.92 ± 0.06, p < 0.001) and Na-K-ATPase-α (0.32 ± 0.07 vs. 0.58 ± 0.15, p < 0.001). In ARDSexp, the gene expression of ion channels and aquaporin was not influenced by salbutamol. Morphological and functional variables and edema formation were not affected by salbutamol in any of the ARDS groups, regardless of the route of administration. Conclusion: Salbutamol administration increased the expression of alveolar epithelial ion channels and aquaporin in mild ARDSp, but not ARDSexp, with no effects on lung morphology and function or edema formation. These results may contribute to explain the negative effects of β2-agonists on clinical outcome in ARDS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In pressure support ventilation (PSV), a non-variable level of pressure support is delivered by the ventilator when triggered by the patient. In contrast, variable PSV delivers a level of pressure support that varies in a random fashion, introducing more physiological variability to the respiratory pattern. Experimental studies show that variable PSV improves gas exchange, reduces lung inflammation and the mean pressure support, compared to nonvariable PSV. Thus, it can theoretically shorten weaning from the mechanical ventilator. Methods/design The ViPS (variable pressure support) trial is an international investigator-initiated multicenter randomized controlled open trial comparing variable vs. non-variable PSV. Adult patients on controlled mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours who are ready to be weaned are eligible for the study. The randomization sequence is blocked per center and performed using a web-based platform. Patients are randomly assigned to one of the two groups: variable PSV or non-variable PSV. In non-variable PSV, breath-by-breath pressure support is kept constant and targeted to achieve a tidal volume of 6 to 8 ml/kg. In variable PSV, the mean pressure support level over a specific time period is targeted at the same mean tidal volume as non-variable PSV, but individual levels vary randomly breath-by breath. The primary endpoint of the trial is the time to successful weaning, defined as the time from randomization to successful extubation. Discussion ViPS is the first randomized controlled trial investigating whether variable, compared to non-variable PSV, shortens the duration of weaning from mechanical ventilation in a mixed population of critically ill patients. This trial aims to determine the role of variable PSV in the intensive care unit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction This study aims at comparing the very short-term effects of conventional and noisy (variable) pressure support ventilation (PSV) in mechanically ventilated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Methods 13 mechanically ventilated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were enrolled in this monocentric, randomized crossover study. Patients were mechanically ventilated with conventional and noisy PSV, for one hour each, in random sequence. Pressure support was titrated to reach tidal volumes ≈8 mL/kg in both modes. The level of positive end-expiratory pressure and fraction of inspired oxygen were kept unchanged in both modes. The coefficient of variation of pressure support during noisy PSV was set at 30%. Gas exchange, hemodynamics, lung functional parameters, distribution of ventilation by electrical impedance tomography, breathing patterns and patient-ventilator synchrony were analyzed. Results Noisy PSV was not associated with any adverse event, and was well tolerated by all patients. Gas exchange, hemodynamics, respiratory mechanics and spatial distribution of ventilation did not differ significantly between conventional and noisy PSV. Noisy PSV increased the variability of tidal volume (24.4 ± 7.8% vs. 13.7 ± 9.1%, P < 0.05) and was associated with a reduced number of asynchrony events compared to conventional PSV (5 [0-15]/30 min vs. 10 [1-37]/30 min, P < 0.05). Conclusions In the very short term, noisy PSV proved safe and feasible in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Compared to conventional PSV, noisy PSV increased the variability of tidal volumes, and was associated with improved patient-ventilator synchrony, at comparable levels of gas exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Post-operative pulmonary complications add to the morbidity and mortality of surgical patients, in particular after general anesthesia >2 hours for abdominal surgery. Whether a protective mechanical ventilation strategy with higher levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and repeated recruitment maneuvers; the "open lung strategy", protects against post-operative pulmonary complications is uncertain. The present study aims at comparing a protective mechanical ventilation strategy with a conventional mechanical ventilation strategy during general anesthesia for abdominal non-laparoscopic surgery.Methods: The PROtective Ventilation using HIgh versus LOw positive end-expiratory pressure ("PROVHILO") trial is a worldwide investigator-initiated multicenter randomized controlled two-arm study. Nine hundred patients scheduled for non-laparoscopic abdominal surgery at high or intermediate risk for post-operative pulmonary complications are randomized to mechanical ventilation with the level of PEEP at 12 cmH(2)O with recruitment maneuvers (the lung-protective strategy) or mechanical ventilation with the level of PEEP at maximum 2 cmH(2)O without recruitment maneuvers (the conventional strategy). The primary endpoint is any post-operative pulmonary complication.Discussion: The PROVHILO trial is the first randomized controlled trial powered to investigate whether an open lung mechanical ventilation strategy in short-term mechanical ventilation prevents against postoperative pulmonary complications.Trial Registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN70332574. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), life-threatening hypoxemia may occur, dictating the need for differentiated ventilator strategies. Pronounced consolidation and/or atelectasis have been well documented in ARDS, but the contribution of regional perfusion to oxygenation has been poorly addressed. Evidence has accumulated that, in ARDS, regional perfusion is extremely variable and may affect oxygenation, independently from the amount of atelectatic-consolidated lung regions. Thus, the response in oxygenation to different ventilatory settings, both during controlled and assisted mechanical ventilation, should be interpreted with caution. In fact, gas exchange may be not determined solely by changes in aeration, but also redistribution of perfusion. Furthermore, regional perfusion can play an important role in worsening of lung injury due to increased transmural pressures. In addition, distribution of perfusion in lungs might affect the delivery of drugs through the pulmonary circulation, including antibiotics. In recent years, several techniques have been developed to determine pulmonary blood flow with increasing level of spatial resolution, allowing a better understanding of normal physiology and various pathophysiological conditions, but most of them are restricted to experimental or clinical research. Lung ultrasound and novel algorithms for electrical impedance tomography represent new promising techniques that could enable physicians to assess the distribution of pulmonary blood flow at the bedside. In ARDS, we cannot afford missing regional lung perfusion! Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-015-0013-0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recruitment maneuvers and the application of high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure combined with lung protective mechanical ventilation strategies have been proposed to improve pulmonary function in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, the optimal way to achieve and maintain alveolar recruitment is still under debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been used in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH), but the role of PEEP in minimizing lung injury remains controversial. We hypothesized that in the presence of acute lung injury (ALI) with IAH: 1) higher PEEP levels improve pulmonary morphofunction and minimize lung injury; and 2) the biological effects of higher PEEP are more effective in extrapulmonary (exp) than pulmonary (p) ALI.Methods: In 48 adult male Wistar rats, ALIp and ALIexp were induced by Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide intratracheally and intraperitoneally, respectively. After 24 hours, animals were anesthetized and mechanically ventilated (tidal volume of 6 mL/kg). IAH (15 mmHg) was induced and rats randomly assigned to PEEP of 5 (PEEP5), 7 (PEEP7) or 10 (PEEP10) cmH2O for 1 hour.Results: In both ALIp and ALIexp, higher PEEP levels improved oxygenation. PEEP10 increased alveolar hyperinflation and epithelial cell damage compared to PEEP5, independent of ALI etiology. In ALIp, PEEP7 and PEEP10 increased lung elastance compared to PEEP5 (4.3 ± 0.7 and 4.3 ± 0.9 versus 3.1 ± 0.3 cmH2O/mL, respectively, P <0.01), without changes in alveolar collapse, interleukin-6, caspase-3, type III procollagen, receptor for advanced glycation end-products, and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 expressions. Moreover, PEEP10 increased diaphragmatic injury compared to PEEP5. In ALIexp, PEEP7 decreased lung elastance and alveolar collapse compared to PEEP5 (2.3 ± 0.5 versus 3.6 ± 0.7 cmH2O/mL, P <0.02, and 27.2 (24.7 to 36.8) versus 44.2 (39.7 to 56.9)%, P <0.05, respectively), while PEEP7 and PEEP10 increased interleukin-6 and type III procollagen expressions, as well as type II epithelial cell damage compared to PEEP5.Conclusions: In the current models of ALI with IAH, in contrast to our primary hypothesis, higher PEEP is more effective in ALIp than ALIexp as demonstrated by the activation of biological markers. Therefore, higher PEEP should be used cautiously in the presence of IAH and ALI, mainly in ALIexp. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Biphasic positive airway pressure (BIVENT) is a partial support mode that employs pressure-controlled, time-cycled ventilation set at two levels of continuous positive airway pressure with unrestricted spontaneous breathing. BIVENT can modulate inspiratory effort by modifying the frequency of controlled breaths. Nevertheless, the optimal amount of inspiratory effort to improve respiratory function while minimizing ventilator-associated lung injury during partial ventilatory assistance has not been determined. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the effects of partial ventilatory support depend on acute lung injury (ALI) etiology. This study aimed to investigate the impact of spontaneous and time-cycled control breaths during BIVENT on the lung and diaphragm in experimental pulmonary (p) and extrapulmonary (exp) ALI.Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled experimental study of 60 adult male Wistar rats. Mild ALI was induced by Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide either intratracheally (ALI(p)) or intraperitoneally (ALI(exp)). After 24 hours, animals were anesthetized and further randomized as follows: (1) pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) with tidal volume (V(t)) = 6 ml/kg, respiratory rate = 100 breaths/min, PEEP = 5 cmH2O, and inspiratory-to-expiratory ratio (I:E) = 1:2; or (2) BIVENT with three spontaneous and time-cycled control breath modes (100, 75, and 50 breaths/min). BIVENT was set with two levels of CPAP (P(high) = 10 cmH2O and P(low) = 5 cmH2O). Inspiratory time was kept constant (T(high) = 0.3 s).Results: BIVENT was associated with reduced markers of inflammation, apoptosis, fibrogenesis, and epithelial and endothelial cell damage in lung tissue in both ALI models when compared to PCV. The inspiratory effort during spontaneous breaths increased during BIVENT-50 in both ALI models. In ALI(p), alveolar collapse was higher in BIVENT-100 than PCV, but decreased during BIVENT-50, and diaphragmatic injury was lower during BIVENT-50 compared to PCV and BIVENT-100. In ALI(exp), alveolar collapse during BIVENT-100 and BIVENT-75 was comparable to PCV, while decreasing with BIVENT-50, and diaphragmatic injury increased during BIVENT-50.Conclusions: In mild ALI, BIVENT had a lower biological impact on lung tissue compared to PCV. In contrast, the response of atelectasis and diaphragmatic injury to BIVENT differed according to the rate of spontaneous/controlled breaths and ALI etiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Almost all patients under general anesthesia for surgery need mechanical ventilation. The harmful effects of short-term intra-operative ventilation on pulmonary integrity are increasingly recognized. Recent investigations suggest protection against so-called ventilation-associated lung injury with the use of lower tidal volumes and/or the use of higher levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). This review and meta-analysis will evaluate the effects of these protective measures on pulmonary and extra-pulmonary complications, and try to discriminate the effects of lower tidal volumes from those of higher levels of PEEP., Methods/design: The Medline database will be searched for observational studies and randomized controlled trials of intra-operative ventilation. Individual patient data will be collected from databases obtained via direct contact with corresponding authors of original articles. The primary endpoint is development of postoperative acute respiratory distress syndrome, the most important postoperative pulmonary complication. Secondary endpoints include hospital length of stay and hospital mortality, and reported intra-operative and postoperative pulmonary and extra-pulmonary complications. Emphasis is put on separating the effects of lower tidal volumes from those of higher levels of PEEP., Discussion: This will be the first meta-analysis of intra-operative ventilation using individual patient data from observational studies and randomized controlled trials. The large sample size could allow discrimination of the effect of the two most frequently used protective measures--that is, lower tidal volumes and higher levels of PEEP. The results of this review and meta-analysis can be used in designing future trials of ventilation.