• J Clin Monit Comput · Oct 2021

    Randomized Controlled Trial

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

    • Savino Spadaro, Salvatore Grasso, Dan Stieper Karbing, Giuseppe Santoro, Giorgio Cavallesco, Pio Maniscalco, Francesca Murgolo, Rosa Di Mussi, Riccardo Ragazzi, Stephen Edward Rees, Carlo Alberto Volta, and Alberto Fogagnolo.
    • Department of Morphology, Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliera-Universitaria Sant' Anna, University of Ferrara, Via Aldo Moro, 8, 44124, Ferrara, Italy. savinospadaro@gmail.com.
    • J Clin Monit Comput. 2021 Oct 1; 35 (5): 1149-1157.

    AbstractDuring 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 (PEEPINCREMENTAL) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEPDECREMENTAL). 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 PEEPINCREMENTAL or PEEPDECREMENTAL strategy to match the lowest ∆P. In the PEEPINCREMENTAL group, PEEP was stepwise titrated from ZEEP up to 16 cm H2O, whereas in the PEEPDECREMENTAL 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 PEEPINCREMENTAL and from 45 [37-58]% to 33 [25-45]% in the PEEPDECREMENTAL group (both p < 0.001 vs baseline). The resulting ∆P, however, was lower in the PEEPDECREMENTAL than in the PEEPINCREMENTAL group (8 [7-11] vs 10 [9-11] cm H2O; p = 0.03). In the PEEPDECREMENTAL group the PaO2/ FIO2 ratio increased significantly after intervention (from 140 [99-176] to 186 [152-243], p < 0.001). Both the PEEPINCREMENTAL and the PEEPDECREMENTAL strategies were able to decrease intraoperative shunt, but only PEEPDECREMENTAL improved oxygenation and lowered intraoperative ΔP.Clinical trial number NCT03635281; August 2018; "retrospectively registered".© 2020. Springer Nature B.V.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.