Cargando…
Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation
During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (∆P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP(INCREMENTAL)) or...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7439797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32816177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z |
_version_ | 1783573050670710784 |
---|---|
author | Spadaro, Savino Grasso, Salvatore Karbing, Dan Stieper Santoro, Giuseppe Cavallesco, Giorgio Maniscalco, Pio Murgolo, Francesca Di Mussi, Rosa Ragazzi, Riccardo Rees, Stephen Edward Volta, Carlo Alberto Fogagnolo, Alberto |
author_facet | Spadaro, Savino Grasso, Salvatore Karbing, Dan Stieper Santoro, Giuseppe Cavallesco, Giorgio Maniscalco, Pio Murgolo, Francesca Di Mussi, Rosa Ragazzi, Riccardo Rees, Stephen Edward Volta, Carlo Alberto Fogagnolo, Alberto |
author_sort | Spadaro, Savino |
collection | PubMed |
description | During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (∆P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP(INCREMENTAL)) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEP(DECREMENTAL)). In this randomized trial, we compared the physiological effects of these two PEEP titration strategies on respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and gas exchange. Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in OLV were randomly assigned to a PEEP(INCREMENTAL) or PEEP(DECREMENTAL) strategy to match the lowest ∆P. In the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) group, PEEP was stepwise titrated from ZEEP up to 16 cm H(2)O, whereas in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group PEEP was decrementally titrated, starting from 16 cm H(2)O, immediately after a lung recruiting manoeuvre. Respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and blood gas analyses were recorded at baseline, after PEEP titration and at the end of surgery. Sixty patients were included in the study. After PEEP titration, shunt decreased similarly in both groups, from 50 [39–55]% to 35 [28–42]% in the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) and from 45 [37–58]% to 33 [25–45]% in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group (both p < 0.001 vs baseline). The resulting ∆P, however, was lower in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) than in the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) group (8 [7–11] vs 10 [9–11] cm H(2)O; p = 0.03). In the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group the PaO(2)/ FIO(2) ratio increased significantly after intervention (from 140 [99–176] to 186 [152–243], p < 0.001). Both the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) and the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) strategies were able to decrease intraoperative shunt, but only PEEP(DECREMENTAL) improved oxygenation and lowered intraoperative ΔP. Clinical trial number NCT03635281; August 2018; “retrospectively registered” ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7439797 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74397972020-08-21 Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation Spadaro, Savino Grasso, Salvatore Karbing, Dan Stieper Santoro, Giuseppe Cavallesco, Giorgio Maniscalco, Pio Murgolo, Francesca Di Mussi, Rosa Ragazzi, Riccardo Rees, Stephen Edward Volta, Carlo Alberto Fogagnolo, Alberto J Clin Monit Comput Original Research During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (∆P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP(INCREMENTAL)) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEP(DECREMENTAL)). In this randomized trial, we compared the physiological effects of these two PEEP titration strategies on respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and gas exchange. Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in OLV were randomly assigned to a PEEP(INCREMENTAL) or PEEP(DECREMENTAL) strategy to match the lowest ∆P. In the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) group, PEEP was stepwise titrated from ZEEP up to 16 cm H(2)O, whereas in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group PEEP was decrementally titrated, starting from 16 cm H(2)O, immediately after a lung recruiting manoeuvre. Respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and blood gas analyses were recorded at baseline, after PEEP titration and at the end of surgery. Sixty patients were included in the study. After PEEP titration, shunt decreased similarly in both groups, from 50 [39–55]% to 35 [28–42]% in the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) and from 45 [37–58]% to 33 [25–45]% in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group (both p < 0.001 vs baseline). The resulting ∆P, however, was lower in the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) than in the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) group (8 [7–11] vs 10 [9–11] cm H(2)O; p = 0.03). In the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) group the PaO(2)/ FIO(2) ratio increased significantly after intervention (from 140 [99–176] to 186 [152–243], p < 0.001). Both the PEEP(INCREMENTAL) and the PEEP(DECREMENTAL) strategies were able to decrease intraoperative shunt, but only PEEP(DECREMENTAL) improved oxygenation and lowered intraoperative ΔP. Clinical trial number NCT03635281; August 2018; “retrospectively registered” ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Netherlands 2020-08-20 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7439797/ /pubmed/32816177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z Text en © Springer Nature B.V. 2020 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Spadaro, Savino Grasso, Salvatore Karbing, Dan Stieper Santoro, Giuseppe Cavallesco, Giorgio Maniscalco, Pio Murgolo, Francesca Di Mussi, Rosa Ragazzi, Riccardo Rees, Stephen Edward Volta, Carlo Alberto Fogagnolo, Alberto Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title | Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title_full | Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title_fullStr | Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title_full_unstemmed | Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title_short | Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
title_sort | physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7439797/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32816177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT spadarosavino physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT grassosalvatore physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT karbingdanstieper physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT santorogiuseppe physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT cavallescogiorgio physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT maniscalcopio physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT murgolofrancesca physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT dimussirosa physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT ragazziriccardo physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT reesstephenedward physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT voltacarloalberto physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation AT fogagnoloalberto physiologicaleffectsoftwodrivingpressurebasedmethodstosetpositiveendexpiratorypressureduringonelungventilation |