Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2024
Comparison of lung aeration loss in open abdominal oncologic surgeries after ventilation with electrical impedance tomography-guided PEEP versus conventional PEEP: a pilot feasibility study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karthik A R, Gupta Nishkarsh, Garg Rakesh, Bharati Sachidanand Jee, Ray M D, Hadda Vijay, Pahuja Sourabh, Mishra Seema, Bhatnagar Sushma, Kumar Vinod
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Existing literature lacks high-quality evidence regarding the ideal intraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to minimize postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). We hypothesized that applying individualized PEEP derived from electrical impedance tomography would reduce the severity of postoperative lung aeration loss, deterioration in oxygenation, and PPC incidence.
METHODS: A pilot feasibility study was conducted on 36 patients who underwent open abdominal oncologic surgery. The patients were randomized to receive individualized PEEP or conventional PEEP at 4 cmH2O. The primary outcome was the impact of individualized PEEP on changes in the modified lung ultrasound score (MLUS) derived from preoperative and postoperative lung ultrasonography. A higher MLUS indicated greater lung aeration loss. The secondary outcomes were the PaO2/FiO2 ratio and PPC incidence.
RESULTS: A significant increase in the postoperative MLUS (12.0 ± 3.6 vs 7.9 ± 2.1, P < 0.001) and a significant difference between the postoperative and preoperative MLUS values (7.0 ± 3.3 vs 3.0 ± 1.6, P < 0.001) were found in the conventional PEEP group, indicating increased lung aeration loss. In the conventional PEEP group, the intraoperative PaO2/FiO2 ratios were significantly lower but not the postoperative ratios. The PPC incidence was not significantly different between the groups. Post-hoc analysis showed the increase in lung aeration loss and deterioration of intraoperative oxygenation correlated with the deviation from the individualized PEEP.
CONCLUSIONS: Individualized PEEP appears to protect against lung aeration loss and intraoperative oxygenation deterioration. The advantage was greater in patients whose individualized PEEP deviated more from the conventional PEEP.
METHODS: A pilot feasibility study was conducted on 36 patients who underwent open abdominal oncologic surgery. The patients were randomized to receive individualized PEEP or conventional PEEP at 4 cmH2O. The primary outcome was the impact of individualized PEEP on changes in the modified lung ultrasound score (MLUS) derived from preoperative and postoperative lung ultrasonography. A higher MLUS indicated greater lung aeration loss. The secondary outcomes were the PaO2/FiO2 ratio and PPC incidence.
RESULTS: A significant increase in the postoperative MLUS (12.0 ± 3.6 vs 7.9 ± 2.1, P < 0.001) and a significant difference between the postoperative and preoperative MLUS values (7.0 ± 3.3 vs 3.0 ± 1.6, P < 0.001) were found in the conventional PEEP group, indicating increased lung aeration loss. In the conventional PEEP group, the intraoperative PaO2/FiO2 ratios were significantly lower but not the postoperative ratios. The PPC incidence was not significantly different between the groups. Post-hoc analysis showed the increase in lung aeration loss and deterioration of intraoperative oxygenation correlated with the deviation from the individualized PEEP.
CONCLUSIONS: Individualized PEEP appears to protect against lung aeration loss and intraoperative oxygenation deterioration. The advantage was greater in patients whose individualized PEEP deviated more from the conventional PEEP.