Perioperative interventions for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the efficacy of perioperative interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Medline, Embase, CINHAL, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to December 2017. Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials investigating short term, protocolised medical interventions conducted before, during, or after non-cardiac surgery were included. Trials with clinical diagnostic criteria for PPC outcomes were included. Studies of surgical technique or physiological or biochemical outcomes were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis Reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methods. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary outcomes were respiratory infection, atelectasis, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate the reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence. Adverse effects of interventions were not measured or compared. Results 117 trials enrolled 21 940 participants, investigating 11 categories of intervention. 95 randomised controlled trials enrolling 18 062 participants were included in meta-analysis; 22 trials were excluded from meta-analysis because the interventions were not sufficiently similar to be pooled. No high quality evidence was found for interventions to reduce the primary outcome (incidence of PPCs). Seven interventions had low or moderate quality evidence with confidence intervals indicating a probable reduction in PPCs: enhanced recovery pathways (risk ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.58), prophylactic mucolytics (0.40, 0.23 to 0.67), postoperative continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (0.49, 0.24 to 0.99), lung protective intraoperative ventilation (0.52, 0.30 to 0.88), prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy (0.55, 0.32 to 0.93), epidural analgesia (0.77, 0.65 to 0.92), and goal directed haemodynamic therapy (0.87, 0.77 to 0.98). Moderate quality evidence showed no benefit for incentive spirometry in preventing PPCs. Trial sequential analysis adjustment confidently supported a relative risk reduction of 25% in PPCs for prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy, epidural analgesia, enhanced recovery pathways, and goal directed haemodynamic therapies. Insufficient data were available to support or refute equivalent relative risk reductions for other interventions. Conclusions Predominantly low quality evidence favours multiple perioperative PPC reduction strategies. Clinicians may choose to reassess their perioperative care pathways, but the results indicate that new trials with a low risk of bias are needed to obtain conclusive evidence of efficacy for many of these interventions. Study registration Prospero CRD42016035662

Volume-Controlled Versus Dual-Controlled Ventilation during Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy with Steep Trendelenburg Position: A Randomized-Controlled Trial

Dual-controlled ventilation (DCV) combines the advantages of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV). Carbon dioxide (CO2) pneumoperitoneum and steep Trendelenburg positioning for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) has negative effects on the respiratory system. We hypothesized that the use of autoflow as one type of DCV can reduce these effects during RALRP. Eighty patients undergoing RALRP were randomly assigned to receive VCV or DCV. Arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) as the primary outcome, respiratory and hemodynamic data, and postoperative fever rates were compared at four time points: 10 min after anesthesia induction (T1), 30 and 60 min after the initiation of CO2 pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg positioning (T2 and T3), and 10 min after supine positioning (T4). There were no significant differences in PaO2 between the two groups. Mean peak airway pressure (Ppeak) was significantly lower in group DCV than in group VCV at T2 (mean difference, 5.0 cm H2O; adjusted p < 0.001) and T3 (mean difference, 3.9 cm H2O; adjusted p < 0.001). Postoperative fever occurring within the first 2 days after surgery was more common in group VCV (12%) than in group DCV (3%) (p = 0.022). Compared with VCV, DCV did not improve oxygenation during RALRP. However, DCV significantly decreased Ppeak without hemodynamic instability.ope

Comparisons of Pressure-controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee and Volume-controlled 1:1 Equal Ratio Ventilation on Oxygenation and Respiratory Mechanics during Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: a Randomized-controlled Trial

Background: During robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), steep Trendelenburg position and carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum are inevitable for surgical exposure, both of which can impair cardiopulmonary function. This study was aimed to compare the effects of pressure-controlled ventilation with volume guarantee (PCV with VG) and 1:1 equal ratio ventilation (ERV) on oxygenation, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics during RALP. Methods: Eighty patients scheduled for RALP were randomly allocated to either the PCV with VG or ERV group. After anesthesia induction, volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) was applied with an inspiratory to expiratory (I/E) ratio of 1:2. Immediately after pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg positioning, VCV with I/E ratio of 1:1 (ERV group) or PCV with VG using Autoflow mode (PCV with VG group) was initiated. At the end of Trendelenburg position, VCV with I/E ratio of 1:2 was resumed. Analysis of arterial blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics were compared between groups at four times: 10 min after anesthesia induction (T1), 30 and 60 min after pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg positioning (T2 and T3), and 10 min after desufflation and resuming the supine position (T4). Results: There were no significant differences in arterial blood gas analyses including arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) between groups throughout the study period. Mean airway pressure (Pmean) were significantly higher in the ERV group than in the PCV with VG group T2 (p<0.001) and T3 (p=0.002). Peak airway pressure and hemodynamic data were comparable in both groups. Conclusion: PCV with VG was an acceptable alternative to ERV during RALP producing similar PaO2 values. The lower Pmean with PCV with VG suggests that it may be preferable in patients with reduced cardiovascular function.ope

Impact of brief prewarming on anesthesia-related core-temperature drop, hemodynamics, microperfusion and postoperative ventilation in cytoreductive surgery of ovarian cancer: a randomized trial

Background: General (GA)- and epidural-anesthesia may cause a drop in body-core-temperature (BCT(drop)), and hypothermia, which may alter tissue oxygenation (StO(2)) and microperfusion after cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Cell metabolism of subcutaneous fat- or skeletal muscle cells, measured in microdialysis, may be affected. We hypothesized that forced-air prewarming during epidural catheter placement and induction of GA maintains normothermia and improves microperfusion. Methods: After ethics approval 47 women scheduled for cytoreductive surgery were prospectively enrolled. Women in the study group were treated with a prewarming of 43 °C during epidural catheter placement. BCT (Spot on®, 3 M) was measured before (T(1)), after induction of GA (T(2)) at 15 min (T(3)) after start of surgery, and until 2 h after ICU admission (T(ICU2h)). Primary endpoint was BCT(drop) between T(1) and T(2). Microperfusion-, hemodynamic- and clinical outcomes were defined as secondary outcomes. Statistical analysis used the Mann-Whitney-U- and non-parametric-longitudinal tests. Results: BCT(drop) was 0.35 °C with prewarming and 0.9 °C without prewarming (p < 0.005) and BCT remained higher over the observation period (ΔT(4) = 0.9 °C up to ΔT(7) = 0.95 °C, p < 0.001). No significant differences in hemodynamic parameters, transfusion, arterial lactate and dCO(2) were measured. In microdialysis the ethanol ratio was temporarily, but not significantly, reduced after prewarming. Lactate, glucose and glycerol after PW tended to be more constant over the entire period. Postoperatively, six women without prewarming, but none after prewarming were mechanical ventilated (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Prewarming at 43 °C reduces the BCT(drop) and maintains normothermia without impeding the perioperative routine patient flow. Microdialysis indicate better preserved parameters of microperfusion. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; ID: NCT02364219; Date of registration: 18-febr-2015

Comparison of pressure-controlled ventilation with volume-controlled ventilation during one-lung ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Not only arterial hypoxemia but acute lung injury also has become the major concerns of one-lung ventilation (OLV). The use of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) for OLV offers the potential advantages of lower airway pressure and intrapulmonary shunt, which result in a reduced risk of barotrauma and improved oxygenation, respectively. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials and KoreaMedto find publications comparing the effects of PCV with those of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) during intraoperative OLV in adults. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed using the Cochrane Review Methods. Results: Six studies (259 participants) were included. The PaO2/FiO(2) ratio in PCV was higher than in VCV [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 11.04 mmHg, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.30 to 21.77, P = 0.04, I-2 = 3 %] and peak inspiratory pressure was significantly lower in PCV (WMD = -4.91 cm H2O, 95 % CI = -7.30 to -2.53, P �� 0.0001, I-2 = 91 %). No differences in PaCO2, tidal volume, heart rate and blood pressure were observed. There were also no differences incompliance, plateau and mean airway pressure. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis provided the evidence of improved oxygenation in PCV. However, it is difficult to draw any definitive conclusions due to the fact that the duration of ventilation in the studies reviewed was insufficient to reveal clinically relevant benefits or disadvantages of PCV. Significantly lower peak inspiratory pressure is the advantage of PCV

General questions of anaesthesiology

This book covers information about basic principles and methods of the modern anesthesiology. For English-speaking students of higher educational institutions III-IV levels of accreditation, postgraduates