Li Xue-Fei, Jiang Rong-Juan, Mao Wen-Jie, Yu Hong, Xin Juan, Yu Hai
Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Department of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu 610041, China.
J Clin Anesth. 2023 Oct;89:111150. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111150. Epub 2023 Jun 10.
Postoperative pulmonary complications occur frequently and are associated with worse postoperative outcomes in cardiac surgical patients. The advantage of driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy in decreasing pulmonary complications remains to be definitively established. We aimed to investigate the effect of intraoperative driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy compared with conventional lung-protective ventilation on pulmonary complications following on-pump cardiac surgery.
Prospective, two-arm, randomized controlled trial.
The West China university hospital in Sichuan, China.
Adult patients who were scheduled for elective on-pump cardiac surgery were enrolled in the study.
Patients undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery were randomized to receive driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy based on positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration or conventional lung-protective ventilation strategy with fixed 5 cmHO of PEEP.
The primary outcome of pulmonary complications (including acute respiratory distress syndrome, atelectasis, pneumonia, pleural effusion, and pneumothorax) within the first 7 postoperative days were prospectively identified. Secondary outcomes included pulmonary complication severity, ICU length of stay, and in-hospital and 30-day mortality.
Between August 2020 and July 2021, we enrolled 694 eligible patients who were included in the final analysis. Postoperative pulmonary complications occurred in 140 (40.3%) patients in the driving pressure group and 142 (40.9%) in the conventional group (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.18; P = 0.877). Intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference between study groups regarding the incidence of primary outcome. The driving pressure group had less atelectasis than the conventional group (11.5% vs 17.0%; relative risk, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.98; P = 0.039). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups.
Among patients who underwent on-pump cardiac surgery, the use of driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy did not reduce the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications when compared with conventional lung-protective ventilation strategy.
心脏手术患者术后肺部并发症频发,且与更差的术后结局相关。驱动压导向通气策略在降低肺部并发症方面的优势仍有待明确确立。我们旨在研究与传统肺保护性通气相比,术中驱动压导向通气策略对体外循环心脏手术后肺部并发症的影响。
前瞻性、双臂、随机对照试验。
中国四川华西医院。
计划进行择期体外循环心脏手术的成年患者纳入本研究。
接受体外循环心脏手术的患者被随机分配接受基于呼气末正压(PEEP)滴定的驱动压导向通气策略或固定PEEP为5 cmH₂O的传统肺保护性通气策略。
前瞻性确定术后前7天内肺部并发症(包括急性呼吸窘迫综合征、肺不张、肺炎、胸腔积液和气胸)的主要结局。次要结局包括肺部并发症严重程度、重症监护病房住院时间、住院期间及30天死亡率。
2020年8月至2021年7月期间,我们纳入了694例符合条件的患者并进行最终分析。驱动压组140例(40.3%)患者发生术后肺部并发症,传统组142例(40.9%)(相对风险,0.99;95%置信区间,0.82 - 1.18;P = 0.877)。意向性分析显示,研究组之间主要结局的发生率无显著差异。驱动压组的肺不张发生率低于传统组(11.5%对17.0%;相对风险,0.68;95%置信区间,0.47 - 0.98;P = 0.039)。两组间次要结局无差异。
在接受体外循环心脏手术的患者中,与传统肺保护性通气策略相比,使用驱动压导向通气策略并未降低术后肺部并发症的风险。