Cargando…

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 hemodynamic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bluth, T., Teichmann, R., Kiss, T., Bobek, I., Canet, J., Cinnella, G., De Baerdemaeker, L., Gregoretti, C., Hedenstierna, G., Hemmes, S. N., Hiesmayr, M., Hollmann, M. W., Jaber, S., Laffey, J. G., Licker, M. J., Markstaller, K., Matot, I., Müller, G., Mills, G. H., Mulier, J. P., Putensen, C., Rossaint, R., Schmitt, J., Senturk, M., Serpa Neto, A., Severgnini, P., Sprung, J., Vidal Melo, M. F., Wrigge, H., Schultz, M. J., Pelosi, P., Gama de Abreu, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5410049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28454590
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0
_version_ 1783232594920341504
author Bluth, T.
Teichmann, R.
Kiss, T.
Bobek, I.
Canet, J.
Cinnella, G.
De Baerdemaeker, L.
Gregoretti, C.
Hedenstierna, G.
Hemmes, S. N.
Hiesmayr, M.
Hollmann, M. W.
Jaber, S.
Laffey, J. G.
Licker, M. J.
Markstaller, K.
Matot, I.
Müller, G.
Mills, G. H.
Mulier, J. P.
Putensen, C.
Rossaint, R.
Schmitt, J.
Senturk, M.
Serpa Neto, A.
Severgnini, P.
Sprung, J.
Vidal Melo, M. F.
Wrigge, H.
Schultz, M. J.
Pelosi, P.
Gama de Abreu, M.
author_facet Bluth, T.
Teichmann, R.
Kiss, T.
Bobek, I.
Canet, J.
Cinnella, G.
De Baerdemaeker, L.
Gregoretti, C.
Hedenstierna, G.
Hemmes, S. N.
Hiesmayr, M.
Hollmann, M. W.
Jaber, S.
Laffey, J. G.
Licker, M. J.
Markstaller, K.
Matot, I.
Müller, G.
Mills, G. H.
Mulier, J. P.
Putensen, C.
Rossaint, R.
Schmitt, J.
Senturk, M.
Serpa Neto, A.
Severgnini, P.
Sprung, J.
Vidal Melo, M. F.
Wrigge, H.
Schultz, M. J.
Pelosi, P.
Gama de Abreu, M.
author_sort Bluth, T.
collection PubMed
description 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/m(2) 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 cmH(2)O with lung recruitment maneuvers (high PEEP) or PEEP of 4 cmH(2)O 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5410049
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54100492017-05-02 Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial Bluth, T. Teichmann, R. Kiss, T. Bobek, I. Canet, J. Cinnella, G. De Baerdemaeker, L. Gregoretti, C. Hedenstierna, G. Hemmes, S. N. Hiesmayr, M. Hollmann, M. W. Jaber, S. Laffey, J. G. Licker, M. J. Markstaller, K. Matot, I. Müller, G. Mills, G. H. Mulier, J. P. Putensen, C. Rossaint, R. Schmitt, J. Senturk, M. Serpa Neto, A. Severgnini, P. Sprung, J. Vidal Melo, M. F. Wrigge, H. Schultz, M. J. Pelosi, P. Gama de Abreu, M. Trials Study Protocol 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/m(2) 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 cmH(2)O with lung recruitment maneuvers (high PEEP) or PEEP of 4 cmH(2)O 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5410049/ /pubmed/28454590 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Study Protocol
Bluth, T.
Teichmann, R.
Kiss, T.
Bobek, I.
Canet, J.
Cinnella, G.
De Baerdemaeker, L.
Gregoretti, C.
Hedenstierna, G.
Hemmes, S. N.
Hiesmayr, M.
Hollmann, M. W.
Jaber, S.
Laffey, J. G.
Licker, M. J.
Markstaller, K.
Matot, I.
Müller, G.
Mills, G. H.
Mulier, J. P.
Putensen, C.
Rossaint, R.
Schmitt, J.
Senturk, M.
Serpa Neto, A.
Severgnini, P.
Sprung, J.
Vidal Melo, M. F.
Wrigge, H.
Schultz, M. J.
Pelosi, P.
Gama de Abreu, M.
Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_short Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_sort protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (probese): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5410049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28454590
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0
work_keys_str_mv AT blutht protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT teichmannr protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kisst protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bobeki protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT canetj protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT cinnellag protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT debaerdemaekerl protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gregorettic protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hedenstiernag protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hemmessn protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hiesmayrm protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hollmannmw protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jabers protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT laffeyjg protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lickermj protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT markstallerk protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT matoti protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mullerg protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT millsgh protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mulierjp protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT putensenc protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rossaintr protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT schmittj protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT senturkm protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT serpanetoa protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT severgninip protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sprungj protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vidalmelomf protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT wriggeh protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT schultzmj protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT pelosip protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gamadeabreum protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT protectiveintraoperativeventilationwithhigherversuslowerlevelsofpositiveendexpiratorypressureinobesepatientsprobesestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial