Individualised, perioperative open-lung ventilation strategy during one-lung ventilation (iPROVE-OLV): a multicentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether individualisation of the perioperative open-lung approach (OLA) to ventilation reduces postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing lung resection. We compared a perioperative individualised OLA (iOLA) ventilation strategy with standard lung-protective ventilation in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with one-lung ventilation. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised controlled trial enrolled patients scheduled for open or video-assisted thoracic surgery using one-lung ventilation in 25 participating hospitals in Spain, Italy, Turkey, Egypt, and Ecuador. Eligible adult patients (age ≥18 years) were randomly assigned to receive iOLA or standard lung-protective ventilation. Eligible patients (stratified by centre) were randomly assigned online by local principal investigators, with an allocation ratio of 1:1. Treatment with iOLA included an alveolar recruitment manoeuvre to 40 cm H2O of end-inspiratory pressure followed by individualised positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titrated to best respiratory system compliance, and individualised postoperative respiratory support with high-flow oxygen therapy. Participants allocated to standard lung-protective ventilation received combined intraoperative 4 cm H2O of PEEP and postoperative conventional oxygen therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of severe postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days, including atelectasis requiring bronchoscopy, severe respiratory failure, contralateral pneumothorax, early extubation failure (rescue with continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or reintubation), acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary infection, bronchopleural fistula, and pleural empyema. Due to trial setting, data obtained in the operating and postoperative rooms for routine monitoring were not blinded. At 24 h, data were acquired by an investigator blinded to group allocation. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03182062, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 11, 2018, and June 14, 2022, we enrolled 1380 patients, of whom 1308 eligible patients (670 [434 male, 233 female, and three with missing data] assigned to iOLA and 638 [395 male, 237 female, and six with missing data] to standard lung-protective ventilation) were included in the final analysis. The proportion of patients with the composite outcome of severe postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days was lower in the iOLA group compared with the standard lung-protective ventilation group (40 [6%] vs 97 [15%], relative risk 0·39 [95% CI 0·28 to 0·56]), with an absolute risk difference of -9·23 (95% CI -12·55 to -5·92). Recruitment manoeuvre-related adverse events were reported in five patients. INTERPRETATION: Among patients subjected to lung resection under one-lung ventilation, iOLA was associated with a reduced risk of severe postoperative pulmonary complications when compared with conventional lung-protective ventilation. FUNDING: Instituto de Salud Carlos III and the European Regional Development Funds.

Effects of oxygen on post-surgical infections during an individualised perioperative open-lung ventilatory strategy: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine whether using a high fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) in the context of an individualised intra- and postoperative open-lung ventilation approach could decrease surgical site infection (SSI) in patients scheduled for abdominal surgery. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial in a network of 21 university hospitals from June 6, 2017 to July 19, 2018. Patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to receive a high (0.80) or conventional (0.3) FIO2 during the intraoperative period and during the first 3 postoperative hours. All patients were mechanically ventilated with an open-lung strategy, which included recruitment manoeuvres and individualised positive end-expiratory pressure for the best respiratory-system compliance, and individualised continuous postoperative airway pressure for adequate peripheral oxyhaemoglobin saturation. The primary outcome was the prevalence of SSI within the first 7 postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were composites of systemic complications, length of intensive care and hospital stay, and 6-month mortality. RESULTS: We enrolled 740 subjects: 371 in the high FIO2 group and 369 in the low FIO2 group. Data from 717 subjects were available for final analysis. The rate of SSI during the first postoperative week did not differ between high (8.9%) and low (9.4%) FIO2 groups (relative risk [RR]: 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.50; P=0.90]). Secondary outcomes, such as atelectasis (7.7% vs 9.8%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.48-1.25; P=0.38) and myocardial ischaemia (0.6% [n=2] vs 0% [n=0]; P=0.47) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: An oxygenation strategy using high FIO2 compared with conventional FIO2 did not reduce postoperative SSIs in abdominal surgery. No differences in secondary outcomes or adverse events were found. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02776046.

Rationale and Study Design for an Individualized Perioperative Open Lung Ventilatory Strategy in Patients on One-Lung Ventilation (iPROVE-OLV).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this clinical trial is to examine whether it is possible to reduce postoperative complications using an individualized perioperative ventilatory strategy versus using a standard lung-protective ventilation strategy in patients scheduled for thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation. DESIGN: International, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING: A network of university hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprises 1,380 patients scheduled for thoracic surgery. INTERVENTIONS: The individualized group will receive intraoperative recruitment maneuvers followed by individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (open lung approach) during the intraoperative period plus postoperative ventilatory support with high-flow nasal cannula, whereas the control group will be managed with conventional lung-protective ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Individual and total number of postoperative complications, including atelectasis, pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, acute lung injury; unplanned readmission and reintubation; length of stay and death in the critical care unit and in the hospital will be analyzed for both groups. The authors hypothesize that the intraoperative application of an open lung approach followed by an individual indication of high-flow nasal cannula in the postoperative period will reduce pulmonary complications and length of hospital stay in high-risk surgical patients.

Open lung approach versus standard protective strategies: Effects on driving pressure and ventilatory efficiency during anesthesia - A pilot, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low tidal volume (VT) during anesthesia minimizes lung injury but may be associated to a decrease in functional lung volume impairing lung mechanics and efficiency. Lung recruitment (RM) can restore lung volume but this may critically depend on the post-RM selected PEEP. This study was a randomized, two parallel arm, open study whose primary outcome was to compare the effects on driving pressure of adding a RM to low-VT ventilation, with or without an individualized post-RM PEEP in patients without known previous lung disease during anesthesia. METHODS: Consecutive patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were submitted to low-VT ventilation (6 ml·kg-1) and standard PEEP of 5 cmH2O (pre-RM, n = 36). After 30 min estabilization all patients received a RM and were randomly allocated to either continue with the same PEEP (RM-5 group, n = 18) or to an individualized open-lung PEEP (OL-PEEP) (Open Lung Approach, OLA group, n = 18) defined as the level resulting in maximal Cdyn during a decremental PEEP trial. We compared the effects on driving pressure and lung efficiency measured by volumetric capnography. RESULTS: OL-PEEP was found at 8±2 cmH2O. 36 patients were included in the final analysis. When compared with pre-RM, OLA resulted in a 22% increase in compliance and a 28% decrease in driving pressure when compared to pre-RM. These parameters did not improve in the RM-5. The trend of the DP was significantly different between the OLA and RM-5 groups (p = 0.002). VDalv/VTalv was significantly lower in the OLA group after the RM (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Lung recruitment applied during low-VT ventilation improves driving pressure and lung efficiency only when applied as an open-lung strategy with an individualized PEEP in patients without lung diseases undergoing major abdominal surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02798133.

Setting individualized positive end-expiratory pressure level with a positive end-expiratory pressure decrement trial after a recruitment maneuver improves oxygenation and lung mechanics during one-lung ventilation.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improves oxygenation, ventilation, and lung mechanics during one-lung ventilation compared with standardized PEEP. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to the study or control group. Both groups received an alveolar recruitment maneuver at the beginning and end of one-lung ventilation. After the alveolar recruitment maneuver, the control group had their lungs ventilated with a 5 cm·H2O PEEP, while the study group had their lungs ventilated with an individualized PEEP level determined by a PEEP decrement trial. Arterial blood samples, lung mechanics, and volumetric capnography were recorded at multiple timepoints throughout the procedure. RESULTS: The individualized PEEP values in study group were higher than the standardized PEEP values (10 ± 2 vs 5 cm·H2O; P < 0.001). In both groups, arterial oxygenation decreased when bilateral-lung ventilation was switched to one-lung ventilation and increased after the alveolar recruitment maneuver. During one-lung ventilation, oxygenation was maintained in the study group but decreased in the control group. After one-lung ventilation, arterial oxygenation was significantly higher in the study group (306 vs 231 mm·Hg, P = 0.007). Static compliance decreased in both groups when bilateral-lung ventilation was switched to one-lung ventilation. Static compliance increased significantly only in the study group (P < 0.001) after the alveolar recruitment maneuver and optimal PEEP adjustment. The alveolar recruitment maneuver did not decrease cardiac index in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: During one-lung ventilation, the improvements in oxygenation and lung mechanics after an alveolar recruitment maneuver were better preserved by ventilation by using individualized PEEP with a PEEP decrement trial than with a standardized 5 cm·H2O of PEEP.

Perioperative management of antiplatelet-drugs in cardiac surgery.

The management of coronary patients scheduled for a coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), who are receiving one or more antiplatelet drugs, is plenty of controversies. It has been shown that withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs is associated with an increased risk of a thrombotic event, but surgery under an altered platelet function also means an increased risk of bleeding in the perioperative period. Because of the conflict recommendations, this review article tries to evaluate the outcome of different perioperative antiplatelet protocols in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing CABG.