Back to Search Start Over

Physiological effects of two driving pressure-based methods to set positive end-expiratory pressure during one lung ventilation.

Authors :
Spadaro S
Grasso S
Karbing DS
Santoro G
Cavallesco G
Maniscalco P
Murgolo F
Di Mussi R
Ragazzi R
Rees SE
Volta CA
Fogagnolo A
Source :
Journal of clinical monitoring and computing [J Clin Monit Comput] 2021 Oct; Vol. 35 (5), pp. 1149-1157. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Aug 20.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

During one-lung ventilation (OLV), titrating the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to target a low driving pressure (∆P) could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. However, it is unclear how to conduct PEEP titration: by stepwise increase starting from zero PEEP (PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> ) or by stepwise decrease after a lung recruiting manoeuvre (PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> ). In this randomized trial, we compared the physiological effects of these two PEEP titration strategies on respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and gas exchange. Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in OLV were randomly assigned to a PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> or PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> strategy to match the lowest ∆P. In the PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> group, PEEP was stepwise titrated from ZEEP up to 16 cm H <subscript>2</subscript> O, whereas in the PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> group PEEP was decrementally titrated, starting from 16 cm H <subscript>2</subscript> O, immediately after a lung recruiting manoeuvre. Respiratory mechanics, ventilation/perfusion mismatch and blood gas analyses were recorded at baseline, after PEEP titration and at the end of surgery. Sixty patients were included in the study. After PEEP titration, shunt decreased similarly in both groups, from 50 [39-55]% to 35 [28-42]% in the PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> and from 45 [37-58]% to 33 [25-45]% in the PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> group (both p < 0.001 vs baseline). The resulting ∆P, however, was lower in the PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> than in the PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> group (8 [7-11] vs 10 [9-11] cm H <subscript>2</subscript> O; p = 0.03). In the PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> group the PaO <subscript>2</subscript> / FIO <subscript>2</subscript> ratio increased significantly after intervention (from 140 [99-176] to 186 [152-243], p < 0.001). Both the PEEP <subscript>INCREMENTAL</subscript> and the PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> strategies were able to decrease intraoperative shunt, but only PEEP <subscript>DECREMENTAL</subscript> improved oxygenation and lowered intraoperative ΔP.Clinical trial number NCT03635281; August 2018; "retrospectively registered".<br /> (© 2020. Springer Nature B.V.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1573-2614
Volume :
35
Issue :
5
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of clinical monitoring and computing
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
32816177
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00582-z