Search

Background: Lung protective ventilation strategies utilizing lower tidal volumes per predicted body weight (PBW) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) have been suggested to be beneficial in a variety of surgical populations. Recent clinical studies have used control groups ventilated with high tidal volumes without PEEP based on the assumption that this reflects current clinical practice. We hypothesized that ventilation strategies have changed over time, that most anesthetics in U.S. academic medical centers are currently performed with lower tidal volumes, and that most receive PEEP. Methods: Intraoperative data were pooled for adults undergoing general anesthesia with tracheal intubation. Median tidal volumes per kilogram of PBW were categorized as > 10, 8-10 and < 8 mL per kg of PBW. The percentages of cases in 2013 that were performed with median tidal volumes < 8 mL per kg of PBW and PEEP were determined. As a secondary analysis, a proportional odds model using institution, year, height, weight and gender determined the relative associations of these factors using categorical and interquartile odds ratios. Results: 295,540 cases were analyzed from 5 institutions over a period of 10 years. In 2013, 59.3% of cases used median tidal volumes < 8 mL per kg of PBW, 83.3% used PEEP, and 51.0% used both. Of those cases with PEEP, 60.9% used a median pressure of ≥ 5 cmH2O. Predictors of lower categories of tidal volumes included height (odds ratio (OR) 10.83, 95% confidence interval [10.50, 11.16]), institution (lowest OR 0.98 [0.96,1.00], highest OR 9.63 [9.41, 9.86]), year (lowest OR 1.32 [1.21, 1.44], highest OR 6.31 [5.84, 6.82]), male gender (OR 1.10 [1.07, 1.12]), and weight (OR 0.30 [0.29, 0.31]). Conclusion: Most general anesthetics with tracheal intubation at the institutions surveyed are currently performed with a median tidal volume < 8 mL per kg of PBW, most are managed with PEEP of ≥5 cmH2O and approximately half utilize both. Given the diversity of the institutions included, this is likely reflective of practice in U.S. academic medical centers. The utilization of higher tidal volumes without PEEP in control groups for clinical research studies should be reconsidered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several plasma volume expander alternatives exist to enhance intravascular volume status in patients undergoing surgery. The optimal intravascular volume expander in the perioperative setting is currently unknown. Low molecular weight hetastarch, Voluven® (130/0.4), may have a better safety profile than high molecular weight hetastarch, Hextend® (450/0.7). We examined the clinical and cost outcomes of converting from Hextend® to Voluven® in a large tertiary medical center. Methods: Using a large electronic database, we retrospectively compared two different time periods (2009 and 2010) where the availability of semisynthetic colloids changed. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes including the use of red blood cells (RBC), platelets and coagulation factors, length of stay in the postoperative acute care unit (PACU), intensive care unit and hospital, as well as 30-day and 1-year mortality were compared. In addition, direct acquisition costs of all intraoperative and PACU colloids and crystalloid use were determined. Results: A total of 4,888 adult subjects were compared of which 1,878 received Hextend® (pre-conversion) and 2,759 received Voluven® (post-conversion) during two separate 7-month periods within 1 year apart, with the remainder receiving Plasmanate. The patients were similar in terms of patient demographics, preoperative comorbidities, ASA status, emergency surgery, types of surgery, intraoperative, and PACU times. In unadjusted outcomes, patients in the Hextend® group received more lactated Ringer's than in the Voluven® group (2,220 + 1,312 vs. 1,946 ± 1,097 ml; P < 0.0001). The use of albumin (Plasmanate) was reduced from 10.5% of patients to 1.1% when Voluven® was substituted for Hextend®. Unadjusted outcomes were similar in each group including hospital LOS, percent change from baseline creatinine and receipt of intraoperative and PACU blood product administration. However, overall unadjusted total fluid costs were greater in the Voluven® compared to Hextend® group ($116.7 compared to $59.3; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Conversion from Hextend® to Voluven® in the perioperative period resulted in decreased albumin use and was not associated with changes in clinical outcomes and short- and long-term mortality. The conversion was associated with decreases in crystalloid use and an increase in colloid use and hence IV fluid acquisition costs in the Voluven® group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]