Individualized versus fixed positive end-expiratory pressure for intraoperative mechanical ventilation in obese patients: a secondary analysis

Background: General anesthesia may cause atelectasis and deterioration in oxygenation in obese patients. The authors hypothesized that individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improves intraoperative oxygenation and ventilation distribution compared to fixed PEEP. Methods: This secondary analysis included all obese patients recruited at University Hospital of Leipzig multicenter Protective Intraoperative Ventilation with Higher versus Lower Levels of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Obese Patients (PROBESE) trial (n = 42) and likewise all obese patients from a local single-center trial (n = 54). Inclusion criteria for both trials were elective laparoscopic abdominal surgery, body mass index greater than or equal to 35 kg/m 2, and Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score greater than or equal to 26. Patients were randomized to PEEP of 4 cm H 2O (n = 19) or a recruitment maneuver followed by PEEP of 12 cm H 2O (n = 21) in the PROBESE study. In the single-center study, they were randomized to PEEP of 5 cm H 2O (n = 25) or a recruitment maneuver followed by individualized PEEP (n = 25) determined by electrical impedance tomography. Primary endpoint was Pao 2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation and secondary endpoints included intraoperative tidal volume distribution to dependent lung and driving pressure. Results: Ninety patients were evaluated in three groups after combining the two lower PEEP groups. Median individualized PEEP was 18 (interquartile range, 16 to 22; range, 10 to 26) cm H 2O. Pao 2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation was 515 (individual PEEP), 370 (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H 2O), and 305 (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H 2O) mmHg (difference to individualized PEEP, 145; 95% CI, 91 to 200; P < 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H 2O and 210; 95% CI, 164 to 257; P < 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H 2O). Intraoperative tidal volume in the dependent lung areas was 43.9% (individualized PEEP), 25.9% (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H 2O) and 26.8% (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H 2O) (difference to individualized PEEP: 18.0%; 95% CI, 8.0 to 20.7; P < 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H 2O and 17.1%; 95% CI, 10.0 to 20.6; P < 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H 2O). Mean intraoperative driving pressure was 9.8 cm H 2O (individualized PEEP), 14.4 cm H 2O (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H 2O), and 18.8 cm H 2O (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H 2O), P < 0.001. Conclusions: This secondary analysis of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery found better oxygenation, lower driving pressures, and redistribution of ventilation toward dependent lung areas measured by electrical impedance tomography using individualized PEEP. The impact on patient outcome remains unclear

Individualized versus Fixed Positive End-expiratory Pressure for Intraoperative Mechanical Ventilation in Obese Patients: A Secondary Analysis

Background: General anesthesia may cause atelectasis and deterioration in oxygenation in obese patients. The authors hypothesized that individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improves intraoperative oxygenation and ventilation distribution compared to fixed PEEP. Methods: This secondary analysis included all obese patients recruited at University Hospital of Leipzig from the multicenter Protective Intraoperative Ventilation with Higher versus Lower Levels of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Obese Patients (PROBESE) trial (n = 42) and likewise all obese patients from a local single-center trial (n = 54). Inclusion criteria for both trials were elective laparoscopic abdominal surgery, body mass index greater than or equal to 35 kg/m2, and Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score greater than or equal to 26. Patients were randomized to PEEP of 4 cm H2O (n = 19) or a recruitment maneuver followed by PEEP of 12 cm H2O (n = 21) in the PROBESE study. In the single-center study, they were randomized to PEEP of 5 cm H2O (n = 25) or a recruitment maneuver followed by individualized PEEP (n = 25) determined by electrical impedance tomography. Primary endpoint was Pao2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation and secondary endpoints included intraoperative tidal volume distribution to dependent lung and driving pressure. Results: Ninety patients were evaluated in three groups after combining the two lower PEEP groups. Median individualized PEEP was 18 (interquartile range, 16 to 22; range, 10 to 26) cm H2O. Pao2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation was 515 (individual PEEP), 370 (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O), and 305 (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O) mmHg (difference to individualized PEEP, 145; 95% CI, 91 to 200; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O and 210; 95% CI, 164 to 257; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O). Intraoperative tidal volume in the dependent lung areas was 43.9% (individualized PEEP), 25.9% (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O) and 26.8% (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O) (difference to individualized PEEP: 18.0%; 95% CI, 8.0 to 20.7; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O and 17.1%; 95% CI, 10.0 to 20.6; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O). Mean intraoperative driving pressure was 9.8 cm H2O (individualized PEEP), 14.4 cm H2O (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O), and 18.8 cm H2O (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O), P &lt; 0.001. Conclusions: This secondary analysis of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery found better oxygenation, lower driving pressures, and redistribution of ventilation toward dependent lung areas measured by electrical impedance tomography using individualized PEEP. The impact on patient outcome remains unclear

Individualized versus Fixed Positive End-expiratory Pressure for Intraoperative Mechanical Ventilation in Obese Patients: A Secondary Analysis

Background: General anesthesia may cause atelectasis and deterioration in oxygenation in obese patients. The authors hypothesized that individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improves intraoperative oxygenation and ventilation distribution compared to fixed PEEP. Methods: This secondary analysis included all obese patients recruited at University Hospital of Leipzig from the multicenter Protective Intraoperative Ventilation with Higher versus Lower Levels of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Obese Patients (PROBESE) trial (n = 42) and likewise all obese patients from a local single-center trial (n = 54). Inclusion criteria for both trials were elective laparoscopic abdominal surgery, body mass index greater than or equal to 35 kg/m2, and Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score greater than or equal to 26. Patients were randomized to PEEP of 4 cm H2O (n = 19) or a recruitment maneuver followed by PEEP of 12 cm H2O (n = 21) in the PROBESE study. In the single-center study, they were randomized to PEEP of 5 cm H2O (n = 25) or a recruitment maneuver followed by individualized PEEP (n = 25) determined by electrical impedance tomography. Primary endpoint was Pao2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation and secondary endpoints included intraoperative tidal volume distribution to dependent lung and driving pressure. Results: Ninety patients were evaluated in three groups after combining the two lower PEEP groups. Median individualized PEEP was 18 (interquartile range, 16 to 22; range, 10 to 26) cm H2O. Pao2/inspiratory oxygen fraction before extubation was 515 (individual PEEP), 370 (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O), and 305 (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O) mmHg (difference to individualized PEEP, 145; 95% CI, 91 to 200; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O and 210; 95% CI, 164 to 257; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O). Intraoperative tidal volume in the dependent lung areas was 43.9% (individualized PEEP), 25.9% (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O) and 26.8% (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O) (difference to individualized PEEP: 18.0%; 95% CI, 8.0 to 20.7; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O and 17.1%; 95% CI, 10.0 to 20.6; P &lt; 0.001 for fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O). Mean intraoperative driving pressure was 9.8 cm H2O (individualized PEEP), 14.4 cm H2O (fixed PEEP of 12 cm H2O), and 18.8 cm H2O (fixed PEEP of 4 to 5 cm H2O), P &lt; 0.001. Conclusions: This secondary analysis of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery found better oxygenation, lower driving pressures, and redistribution of ventilation toward dependent lung areas measured by electrical impedance tomography using individualized PEEP. The impact on patient outcome remains unclear

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

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

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 outcomewas 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 SpO(2) 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