Cargando…

Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the use of low tidal volume ventilation with the application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may benefit patients at risk of respiratory complications during general anaesthesia. However current Australian practice in this area is unknown. METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karalapillai, Dharshi, Weinberg, Laurence, Galtieri, Jonathan, Glassford, Neil, Eastwood, Glenn, Darvall, Jai, Geertsema, Jake, Bangia, Ravi, Fitzgerald, Jane, Phan, Tuong, OHallaran, Luke, Cocciante, Adriano, Watson, Stuart, Story, David, Bellomo, Rinaldo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4190393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25302048
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-14-85
_version_ 1782338500966744064
author Karalapillai, Dharshi
Weinberg, Laurence
Galtieri, Jonathan
Glassford, Neil
Eastwood, Glenn
Darvall, Jai
Geertsema, Jake
Bangia, Ravi
Fitzgerald, Jane
Phan, Tuong
OHallaran, Luke
Cocciante, Adriano
Watson, Stuart
Story, David
Bellomo, Rinaldo
author_facet Karalapillai, Dharshi
Weinberg, Laurence
Galtieri, Jonathan
Glassford, Neil
Eastwood, Glenn
Darvall, Jai
Geertsema, Jake
Bangia, Ravi
Fitzgerald, Jane
Phan, Tuong
OHallaran, Luke
Cocciante, Adriano
Watson, Stuart
Story, David
Bellomo, Rinaldo
author_sort Karalapillai, Dharshi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the use of low tidal volume ventilation with the application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may benefit patients at risk of respiratory complications during general anaesthesia. However current Australian practice in this area is unknown. METHODS: To describe current practice of intraoperative ventilation with regard to tidal volume and application of PEEP, we performed a multicentre audit in patients undergoing general anaesthesia across eight teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: We obtained information including demographic characteristics, type of surgery, tidal volume and the use of PEEP in a consecutive cohort of 272 patients. The median age was 56 (IQR 42–69) years; 150 (55%) were male. Most common diagnostic groups were general surgery (31%), orthopaedic surgery (20%) and neurosurgery (9.6%). Mean FiO(2) was 0.6 (IQR 0.5-0.7). Median tidal volume was 500 ml (IQR 450-550). PEEP was used in 54% of patients with a median value of 5.0 cmH(2)O (IQR 4.0-5.0) and median tidal volume corrected for predicted body weight was 9.5 ml/kg (IQR 8.5-10.4). Median peak inspiratory pressure was 18 cmH(2)O (IQR 15–22). In a cohort of patients considered at risk for respiratory complications, the median tidal volume was still 9.8 ml/kg (IQR 8.6-10.7) and PEEP was applied in 66% of patients with a median value of 5 cmH(2)0 (IQR 4–5). On multivariate analyses positive predictors of tidal volume size included male sex (p < 0.01), height (p = 0.04) and weight (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of the use of PEEP included surgery in a tertiary hospital (OR = 3.11; 95% CI: 1.05 to 9.23) and expected prolonged duration of surgery (OR = 2.47; 95% CI: 1.04 to 5.84). CONCLUSION: In mechanically ventilated patients under general anaesthesia, tidal volume was high and PEEP was applied to the majority of patients, but at modest levels. The findings of our study suggest that the control groups of previous randomized controlled trials do not closely reflect the practice of mechanical ventilation in Australia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4190393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41903932014-10-10 Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia Karalapillai, Dharshi Weinberg, Laurence Galtieri, Jonathan Glassford, Neil Eastwood, Glenn Darvall, Jai Geertsema, Jake Bangia, Ravi Fitzgerald, Jane Phan, Tuong OHallaran, Luke Cocciante, Adriano Watson, Stuart Story, David Bellomo, Rinaldo BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the use of low tidal volume ventilation with the application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may benefit patients at risk of respiratory complications during general anaesthesia. However current Australian practice in this area is unknown. METHODS: To describe current practice of intraoperative ventilation with regard to tidal volume and application of PEEP, we performed a multicentre audit in patients undergoing general anaesthesia across eight teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: We obtained information including demographic characteristics, type of surgery, tidal volume and the use of PEEP in a consecutive cohort of 272 patients. The median age was 56 (IQR 42–69) years; 150 (55%) were male. Most common diagnostic groups were general surgery (31%), orthopaedic surgery (20%) and neurosurgery (9.6%). Mean FiO(2) was 0.6 (IQR 0.5-0.7). Median tidal volume was 500 ml (IQR 450-550). PEEP was used in 54% of patients with a median value of 5.0 cmH(2)O (IQR 4.0-5.0) and median tidal volume corrected for predicted body weight was 9.5 ml/kg (IQR 8.5-10.4). Median peak inspiratory pressure was 18 cmH(2)O (IQR 15–22). In a cohort of patients considered at risk for respiratory complications, the median tidal volume was still 9.8 ml/kg (IQR 8.6-10.7) and PEEP was applied in 66% of patients with a median value of 5 cmH(2)0 (IQR 4–5). On multivariate analyses positive predictors of tidal volume size included male sex (p < 0.01), height (p = 0.04) and weight (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of the use of PEEP included surgery in a tertiary hospital (OR = 3.11; 95% CI: 1.05 to 9.23) and expected prolonged duration of surgery (OR = 2.47; 95% CI: 1.04 to 5.84). CONCLUSION: In mechanically ventilated patients under general anaesthesia, tidal volume was high and PEEP was applied to the majority of patients, but at modest levels. The findings of our study suggest that the control groups of previous randomized controlled trials do not closely reflect the practice of mechanical ventilation in Australia. BioMed Central 2014-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4190393/ /pubmed/25302048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-14-85 Text en © Karalapillai et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Karalapillai, Dharshi
Weinberg, Laurence
Galtieri, Jonathan
Glassford, Neil
Eastwood, Glenn
Darvall, Jai
Geertsema, Jake
Bangia, Ravi
Fitzgerald, Jane
Phan, Tuong
OHallaran, Luke
Cocciante, Adriano
Watson, Stuart
Story, David
Bellomo, Rinaldo
Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title_full Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title_fullStr Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title_full_unstemmed Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title_short Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia
title_sort current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in melbourne, australia
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4190393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25302048
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-14-85
work_keys_str_mv AT karalapillaidharshi currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT weinberglaurence currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT galtierijonathan currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT glassfordneil currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT eastwoodglenn currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT darvalljai currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT geertsemajake currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT bangiaravi currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT fitzgeraldjane currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT phantuong currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT ohallaranluke currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT coccianteadriano currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT watsonstuart currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT storydavid currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia
AT bellomorinaldo currentventilationpracticeduringgeneralanaesthesiaaprospectiveauditinmelbourneaustralia