Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery: an international, multicentre observational study

Background: International data on the epidemiology, ventilation practice, and outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) are lacking. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and to describe ventilator management after abdominal RAS. Methods: This was an international, multicentre, prospective study in 34 centres in nine countries. Patients ≥18 yr of age undergoing abdominal RAS were enrolled between April 2017 and March 2019. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score was used to stratify for higher risk of PPCs (≥26). The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary endpoints included the preoperative risk for PPCs and ventilator management. Results: Of 1167 subjects screened, 905 abdominal RAS patients were included. Overall, 590 (65.2%) patients were at increased risk for PPCs. Meanwhile, 172 (19%) patients sustained PPCs, which occurred more frequently in 132 (22.4%) patients at increased risk, compared with 40 (12.7%) patients at lower risk of PPCs (absolute risk difference: 12.2% [95% confidence intervals (CI), 6.8–17.6%]; P<0.001). Plateau and driving pressures were higher in patients at increased risk, compared with patients at low risk of PPCs, but no ventilatory variables were independently associated with increased occurrence of PPCs. Development of PPCs was associated with a longer hospital stay. Conclusions: One in five patients developed one or more PPCs (chiefly unplanned oxygen requirement), which was associated with a longer hospital stay. No ventilatory variables were independently associated with PPCs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02989415

Clinical advantages and disadvantages of anabolic bone therapies targeting the WNT pathway

Diabetes mellitus: pathophysiological changes and therap

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

Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery : an international, multicentre observational study

Background: International data on the epidemiology, ventilation practice, and outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) are lacking. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and to describe ventilator management after abdominal RAS. Methods: This was an international, multicentre, prospective study in 34 centres in nine countries. Patients >= 18 yr of age undergoing abdominal RAS were enrolled between April 2017 and March 2019. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score was used to stratify for higher risk of PPCs (>= 26). The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary endpoints included the preoperative risk for PPCs and ventilator management. Results: Of 1167 subjects screened, 905 abdominal RAS patients were included. Overall, 590 (65.2%) patients were at increased risk for PPCs. Meanwhile, 172 (19%) patients sustained PPCs, which occurred more frequently in 132 (22.4%) patients at increased risk, compared with 40 (12.7%) patients at lower risk of PPCs (absolute risk difference: 12.2% [95% confidence intervals (CI), 6.8-17.6%]; P<0.001). Plateau and driving pressures were higher in patients at increased risk, compared with patients at low risk of PPCs, but no ventilatory variables were independently associated with increased occurrence of PPCs. Development of PPCs was associated with a longer hospital stay. Conclusions: One in five patients developed one or more PPCs (chiefly unplanned oxygen requirement), which was associated with a longer hospital stay. No ventilatory variables were independently associated with PPCs

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 (vol 321, pg 2292, 2019)

status: publishe