14 research outputs found
Management of Severe Portopulmonary Hypertension With Dual Oral Therapy Before Liver Transplantation.
Ventilatory management and early mobilization of the obese patient in the intensive care unit
Multimodal non-invasive monitoring to apply an open lung approach strategy in morbidly obese patients during bariatric surgery
To evaluate the use of non-invasive variables for monitoring an open-lung approach (OLA) strategy in bariatric surgery. Twelve morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery received a baseline protective ventilation with 8 cmH2O of positive-end expiratory pressure (PEEP). Then, the OLA strategy was applied consisting in lung recruitment followed by a decremental PEEP trial, from 20 to 8 cmH2O, in steps of 2 cmH2O to find the lung’s closing pressure. Baseline ventilation was then resumed setting open lung PEEP (OL-PEEP) at 2 cmH2O above this pressure. The multimodal non-invasive variables used for monitoring OLA consisted in pulse oximetry (SpO2), respiratory compliance (Crs), end-expiratory lung volume measured by a capnodynamic method (EELVCO2), and esophageal manometry. OL-PEEP was detected at 15.9 ± 1.7 cmH2O corresponding to a positive end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure (PL,ee) of 0.9 ± 1.1 cmH2O. ROC analysis showed that SpO2 was more accurate (AUC 0.92, IC95% 0.87–0.97) than Crs (AUC 0.76, IC95% 0.87–0.97) and EELVCO2 (AUC 0.73, IC95% 0.64–0.82) to detect the lung’s closing pressure according to the change of PL,ee from positive to negative values. Compared to baseline ventilation with 8 cmH2O of PEEP, OLA increased EELVCO2 (1309 ± 517 vs. 2177 ± 679 mL) and decreased driving pressure (18.3 ± 2.2 vs. 10.1 ± 1.7 cmH2O), estimated shunt (17.7 ± 3.4 vs. 4.2 ± 1.4%), lung strain (0.39 ± 0.07 vs. 0.22 ± 0.06) and lung elastance (28.4 ± 5.8 vs. 15.3 ± 4.3 cmH2O/L), respectively; all p < 0.0001. The OLA strategy can be monitored using noninvasive variables during bariatric surgery. This strategy decreased lung strain, elastance and driving pressure compared with standard protective ventilatory settings.Fil: Tusman, Gerardo. Fundación Medica de Mar del Plata. Hospital Privado de Comunidad; ArgentinaFil: Acosta, Cecilia Maria. Fundación Medica de Mar del Plata. Hospital Privado de Comunidad; ArgentinaFil: Ochoa, Marcos Raúl. Fundación Medica de Mar del Plata. Hospital Privado de Comunidad; ArgentinaFil: Böhm, Stephan H.. Universität Rostock; AlemaniaFil: Gogniat, Emiliano. Sociedad Argentina de Cuidados Intensivos; ArgentinaFil: Martinez Arca, Jorge. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ingeniería. Departamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica. Laboratorio de Bioingeniería; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata; ArgentinaFil: Scandurra, Adriana Gabriela. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ingeniería. Departamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica. Laboratorio de Bioingeniería; ArgentinaFil: Madorno, Matías. Instituto Tecnológico de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Ferrando, Carlos. Hospital Clínico Barcelona; EspañaFil: Suarez Sipmann, Fernando. Universidad Autonoma de Madrid. Hospital Universitario de la Princesa; España. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias; España. Uppsala Universitet; Sueci
The Influence of Body Mass Index on Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: Does the Obesity Paradox Really Exist?
Multimodal non-invasive monitoring to apply an open lung approach strategy in morbidly obese patients during bariatric surgery
Effect of Intraoperative High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) with Recruitment Maneuvers vs Low PEEP on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Obese Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Importance: An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H2O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H2O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with Spo2 ≤92% for >1 minute). Results: Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P =.23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, -8.6% [95% CI, -11.1% to 6.1%]; P <.001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02148692