Association between night-time surgery and occurrence of intraoperative adverse events and postoperative pulmonary complications.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this post hoc analysis of a large cohort study was to evaluate the association between night-time surgery and the occurrence of intraoperative adverse events (AEs) and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). METHODS: LAS VEGAS (Local Assessment of Ventilatory Management During General Anesthesia for Surgery) was a prospective international 1-week study that enrolled adult patients undergoing surgical procedures with general anaesthesia and mechanical ventilation in 146 hospitals across 29 countries. Surgeries were defined as occurring during 'daytime' when induction of anaesthesia was between 8:00 AM and 7:59 PM, and as 'night-time' when induction was between 8:00 PM and 7:59 AM. RESULTS: Of 9861 included patients, 555 (5.6%) underwent surgery during night-time. The proportion of patients who developed intraoperative AEs was higher during night-time surgery in unmatched (43.6% vs 34.1%; P<0.001) and propensity-matched analyses (43.7% vs 36.8%; P=0.029). PPCs also occurred more often in patients who underwent night-time surgery (14% vs 10%; P=0.004) in an unmatched cohort analysis, although not in a propensity-matched analysis (13.8% vs 11.8%; P=0.39). In a multivariable regression model, including patient characteristics and types of surgery and anaesthesia, night-time surgery was independently associated with a higher incidence of intraoperative AEs (odds ratio: 1.44; 95% confidence interval: 1.09-1.90; P=0.01), but not with a higher incidence of PPCs (odds ratio: 1.32; 95% confidence interval: 0.89-1.90; P=0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative adverse events and postoperative pulmonary complications occurred more often in patients undergoing night-time surgery. Imbalances in patients' clinical characteristics, types of surgery, and intraoperative management at night-time partially explained the higher incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, but not the higher incidence of adverse events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01601223.

Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H2O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H2O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with Spo2 ≤92% for >1 minute). Results: Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P = .23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, -8.6% [95% CI, -11.1% to 6.1%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02148692.

Ten important articles on noninvasive ventilation in critically ill patients and insights for the future: A report of expert opinions.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation is used worldwide in many settings. Its effectiveness has been proven for common clinical conditions in critical care such as cardiogenic pulmonary edema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Since the first pioneering studies of noninvasive ventilation in critical care in the late 1980s, thousands of studies and articles have been published on this topic. Interestingly, some aspects remain controversial (e.g. its use in de-novo hypoxemic respiratory failure, role of sedation, self-induced lung injury). Moreover, the role of NIV has recently been questioned and reconsidered in light of the recent reports of new techniques such as high-flow oxygen nasal therapy. METHODS: We conducted a survey among leading experts on NIV aiming to 1) identify a selection of 10 important articles on NIV in the critical care setting 2) summarize the reasons for the selection of each study 3) offer insights on the future for both clinical application and research on NIV. RESULTS: The experts selected articles over a span of 26 years, more clustered in the last 15 years. The most voted article studied the role of NIV in acute exacerbation chronic pulmonary disease. Concerning the future of clinical applications for and research on NIV, most of the experts forecast the development of innovative new interfaces more adaptable to patients characteristics, the need for good well-designed large randomized controlled trials of NIV in acute "de novo" hypoxemic respiratory failure (including its comparison with high-flow oxygen nasal therapy) and the development of software-based NIV settings to enhance patient-ventilator synchrony. CONCLUSIONS: The selection made by the experts suggests that some applications of NIV in critical care are supported by solid data (e.g. COPD exacerbation) while others are still waiting for confirmation. Moreover, the identified insights for the future would lead to improved clinical effectiveness, new comparisons and evaluation of its role in still "lack of full evidence" clinical settings.

PEEP role in ICU and operating room: from pathophysiology to clinical practice.

Positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) may prevent cyclic opening and collapsing alveoli in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients, but it may play a role also in general anesthesia. This review is organized in two sections. The first one reports the pathophysiological effect of PEEP on thoracic pressure and hemodynamic and cerebral perfusion pressure. The second section summarizes the knowledge and evidence of the use of PEEP in general anesthesia and intensive care. More specifically, for intensive care this review refers to ARDS and traumatic brain injured patients.

Effectiveness and safety of a new helmet CPAP configuration allowing tidal volume monitoring in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: High generated tidal volumes (Vt) have been correlated with higher risk of self-induced lung injury and worse clinical outcome. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a new helmet continuous positive airway pressure delivered (h-CPAP) configuration allowing Vt monitoring in patients affected by COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective observational study was performed in the respiratory intermediate care unit of University Hospital in Turin, Italy, between March 24th, and June 15th, 2020. Included patients were treated with CPAP via a single-limb intentional leak configuration by a turbine-driven ventilator, provided with a dedicated patch. Effectiveness and safety of the configuration and healthcare workers safety were the outcomes of the study. MAIN FINDINGS: Thirty-five patients were included in this study. Median age was 67 years (IQR 57-76 years), and 30 patients (85.7%) were men. Median value of overall leaks (intentional plus unintentional) was 68 L/min (IQR 63-75). Reliability of Vt measurements was 100%. An out of scale of Vt (above 50% compared to the previous values) was never recorded. Six patients (17.1%) needed more than two helmet replacements, due to leak test >10 l/min. Arm oedema and skin breakdowns were reported in sixteen (45.7%) and seven (20%) patients respectively. Among the 63 healthcare workers involved in the care of COVID-19 patients during the study only one was positive at RT-PCR nasopharyngeal swab testing. CONCLUSIONS: The use of h-CPAP for treating COVID-19 in this configuration allowed for reliable Vt monitoring. Further studies evaluating this configuration in larger patients' cohorts are needed.

Performance of helmet CPAP using different configurations: Turbine-driven ventilators vs Venturi devices.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, Venturi-based flow generators have been preferred over mechanical ventilators to provide continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) through the helmet (h-CPAP). Recently, modern turbine-driven ventilators (TDVs) showed to be safe and effective in delivering h-CPAP. We aimed to compare the pressure stability during h-CPAP delivered by Venturi devices and TDVs and assess the impact of High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters on their performance. METHODS: We performed a bench study using an artificial lung simulator set in a restrictive respiratory condition, simulating two different levels of patient effort (high and low) with and without the interposition of the HEPA filter. We calculated the average of minimal (Pmin), maximal (Pmax) and mean (Pmean) airway pressure and the time product measured on the airway pressure curve (PTPinsp). We defined the pressure swing (Pswing) as Pmax - Pmin and pressure drop (Pdrop) as End Expiratory Pressure - Pmin. RESULTS: Pswing across CPAP levels varied widely among all the tested devices. During "low effort", no difference in Pswing and Pdrop was found between Venturi devices and TDVs; during high effort, Pswing (p<0.001) and Pdrop (p<0.001) were significantly higher in TDVs compared to Venturi devices, but the PTPinsp was lower (1.50 SD 0.54 vs 1.67 SD 0.55, p<0.001). HEPA filter addition almost doubled Pswing and PTPinsp (p<0.001) but left unaltered the differences among Venturi and TDVs systems in favor of the latter (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TDVs performed better than Venturi systems in delivering a stable positive pressure level during h-CPAP in a bench setting.

Use of Helmet CPAP in COVID-19 - A practical review.

Helmet CPAP (H-CPAP) has been recommended in many guidelines as a noninvasive respiratory support during COVID-19 pandemic in many countries around the world. It has the least amount of particle dispersion and air contamination among all noninvasive devices and may mitigate the ICU bed shortage during a COVID surge as well as a decreased need for intubation/mechanical ventilation. It can be attached to many oxygen delivery sources. The MaxVenturi setup is preferred as it allows for natural humidification, low noise burden, and easy transition to HFNC during breaks and it is the recommended transport set-up. The patients can safely be proned with the helmet. It can also be used to wean the patients from invasive mechanical ventilation. Our article reviews in depth the pathophysiology of COVID-19 ARDS, provides rationale of using H-CPAP, suggests a respiratory failure algorithm, guides through its setup and discusses the issues and concerns around using it.

Rationale and evidence on the use of tocilizumab in COVID-19: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab is an IL-6 receptor-blocking agent proposed for the treatment of severe COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the rationale for the use of tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19 and to summarize the available evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, pre-print repositories (bioRxiv and medRxiv) and two trial Registries were searched for studies on the use of tocilizumab in COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and/or sepsis until 20th June 2020. RESULTS: We identified 3 indirect pre-clinical studies and 28 clinical studies including 5776 patients with COVID-19 (13 with a comparison group, 15 single-arm). To date, no randomized trials have been published. We retrieved no studies at low risk of bias. Forty-five ongoing studies were retrieved from trial registries. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence regarding the clinical efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19. Its use should be considered experimental, requiring ethical approval and clinical trial oversight.

Protective ventilation with high versus low positive end-expiratory pressure during one-lung ventilation for thoracic surgery (PROTHOR): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative 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. METHODS: PROTHOR 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. DISCUSSION: PROTHOR 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 REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02963025 ) on 15 November 2016.

Correction to: Protective ventilation with high versus low positive end-expiratory pressure during one-lung ventilation for thoracic surgery (PROTHOR): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

After publication of the original article [1], the authors have notified us that two of the collaborator first and last names have been inverted in the "PROTHOR Investigators" table.

Understanding international differences in terminology for delirium and other types of acute brain dysfunction in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Delirium (acute brain dysfunction) is a potentially life threatening disturbance in brain function that frequently occurs in critically ill patients. While this area of brain dysfunction in critical care is rapidly advancing, striking limitations in use of terminology related to delirium internationally are hindering cross-talk and collaborative research. In the English literature, synonyms of delirium such as the Intensive Care Unit syndrome, acute brain dysfunction, acute brain failure, psychosis, confusion, and encephalopathy are widely used. This often leads to scientific "confusion" regarding published data and methodology within studies, which is further exacerbated by organizational, cultural and language barriers. OBJECTIVE: We undertook this multinational effort to identify conflicts in terminology and phenomenology of delirium to facilitate communication across medical disciplines and languages. METHODS: The evaluation of the terminology used for acute brain dysfunction was determined conducting communications with 24 authors from academic communities throughout countries/regions that speak the 13 variants of the Romanic languages included into this manuscript. RESULTS: In the 13 languages utilizing Romanic characters, included in this report, we identified the following terms used to define major types of acute brain dysfunction: coma, delirium, delirio, delirium tremens, délire, confusion mentale, delir, delier, Durchgangs-Syndrom, acute verwardheid, intensiv-psykose, IVA-psykos, IVA-syndrom, akutt konfusion/forvirring. Interestingly two terms are very consistent: 100 % of the selected languages use the term coma or koma to describe patients unresponsive to verbal and/or physical stimuli, and 100% use delirium tremens to define delirium due to alcohol withdrawal. Conversely, only 54% use the term delirium to indicate the disorder as defined by the DSM-IV as an acute change in mental status, inattention, disorganized thinking and altered level of consciousness. CONCLUSIONS: Attempts towards standardization in terminology, or at least awareness of differences across languages and specialties, will help cross-talk among clinicians and researchers.

Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) increase the morbidity and mortality of surgery in obese patients. High levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with lung recruitment maneuvers may improve intraoperative respiratory function, but they can also compromise hemodynamics, and the effects on PPCs are uncertain. We hypothesized that intraoperative mechanical ventilation using high PEEP with periodic recruitment maneuvers, as compared with low PEEP without recruitment maneuvers, prevents PPCs in obese patients. METHODS/DESIGN: The PRotective Ventilation with Higher versus Lower PEEP during General Anesthesia for Surgery in OBESE Patients (PROBESE) study is a multicenter, two-arm, international randomized controlled trial. In total, 2013 obese patients with body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 scheduled for at least 2 h of surgery under general anesthesia and at intermediate to high risk for PPCs will be included. Patients are ventilated intraoperatively with a low tidal volume of 7 ml/kg (predicted body weight) and randomly assigned to PEEP of 12 cmH2O with lung recruitment maneuvers (high PEEP) or PEEP of 4 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers (low PEEP). The occurrence of PPCs will be recorded as collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, the PROBESE trial is the first multicenter, international randomized controlled trial to compare the effects of two different levels of intraoperative PEEP during protective low tidal volume ventilation on PPCs in obese patients. The results of the PROBESE trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to choose a certain PEEP level during general anesthesia for surgery in obese patients in an attempt to prevent PPCs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02148692. Registered on 23 May 2014; last updated 7 June 2016.