| 1. |
- Carraminana, Albert, et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale and Study Design for an Individualized Perioperative Open Lung Ventilatory Strategy in Patients on One-Lung Ventilation (iPROVE-OLV)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. - : W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC. - 1053-0770 .- 1532-8422. ; 33:9, s. 2492-2502
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The aim of this clinical trial is to examine whether it is possible to reduce postoperative complications using an individualized perioperative ventilatory strategy versus using a standard lung-protective ventilation strategy in patients scheduled for thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation. Design: International, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting: A network of university hospitals. Participants: The study comprises 1,380 patients scheduled for thoracic surgery. Interventions: The individualized group will receive intraoperative recruitment maneuvers followed by individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (open lung approach) during the intraoperative period plus postoperative ventilatory support with high-flow nasal cannula, whereas the control group will be managed with conventional lung-protective ventilation. Measurements and Main Results: Individual and total number of postoperative complications, including atelectasis, pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, acute lung injury; unplanned readmission and reintubation; length of stay and death in the critical care unit and in the hospital will be analyzed for both groups. The authors hypothesize that the intraoperative application of an open lung approach followed by an individual indication of high-flow nasal cannula in the postoperative period will reduce pulmonary complications and length of hospital stay in high-risk surgical patients. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Individualised perioperative open-lung approach versus standard protective ventilation in abdominal surgery (iPROVE) : a randomised controlled trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 2213-2600 .- 2213-2619. ; 6:3, s. 193-203
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The effects of individualised perioperative lung-protective ventilation (based on the open-lung approach [OLA]) on postoperative complications is unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of intraoperative and postoperative ventilatory management in patients scheduled for abdominal surgery, compared with standard protective ventilation. Methods We did this prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in 21 teaching hospitals in Spain. We enrolled patients who were aged 18 years or older, were scheduled to have abdominal surgery with an expected time of longer than 2 h, had intermediate-to-high-risk of developing postoperative pulmonary complications, and who had a body-mass index less than 35 kg/m(2). Patients were randomly assigned (1: 1: 1: 1) online to receive one of four lung-protective ventilation strategies using low tidal volume plus positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP): open-lung approach (OLA)-iCPAP (individualised intraoperative ventilation [individualised PEEP after a lung recruitment manoeuvre] plus individualised postoperative continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP]), OLA-CPAP (intraoperative individualised ventilation plus postoperative CPAP), STD-CPAP (standard intraoperative ventilation plus postoperative CPAP), or STD-O-2 (standard intraoperative ventilation plus standard postoperative oxygen therapy). Patients were masked to treatment allocation. Investigators were not masked in the operating and postoperative rooms; after 24 h, data were given to a second investigator who was masked to allocations. The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary and systemic complications during the first 7 postoperative days. We did the primary analysis using the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02158923. Findings Between Jan 2, 2015, and May 18, 2016, we enrolled 1012 eligible patients. Data were available for 967 patients, whom we included in the final analysis. Risk of pulmonary and systemic complications did not differ for patients in OLA-iCPAP (110 [46%] of 241, relative risk 0.89 [95% CI 0.74-1.07; p=0.25]), OLA-CPAP (111 [47%] of 238, 0.91 [0.76-1.09; p=0.35]), or STD-CPAP groups (118 [48%] of 244, 0.95 [0.80-1.14; p=0.65]) when compared with patients in the STD-O-2 group (125 [51%] of 244). Intraoperatively, PEEP was increased in 69 (14%) of patients in the standard perioperative ventilation groups because of hypoxaemia, and no patients from either of the OLA groups required rescue manoeuvres. Interpretation In patients who have major abdominal surgery, the different perioperative open lung approaches tested in this study did not reduce the risk of postoperative complications when compared with standard lung-protective mechanical ventilation.
|
|
| 3. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Effects of oxygen on post-surgical infections during an individualised perioperative open-lung ventilatory strategy : a randomised controlled trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Anaesthesia. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 0007-0912 .- 1471-6771. ; 124:1, s. 110-120
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We aimed to examine whether using a high fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) in the context of an individualised intra- and postoperative open-lung ventilation approach could decrease surgical site infection (SSI) in patients scheduled for abdominal surgery. Methods: We performed a multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial in a network of 21 university hospitals from June 6, 2017 to July 19, 2018. Patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to receive a high (0.80) or conventional (0.3) FIO2 during the intraoperative period and during the first 3 postoperative hours. All patients were mechanically ventilated with an open-lung strategy, which included recruitment manoeuvres and individualised positive end-expiratory pressure for the best respiratory-system compliance, and individualised continuous postoperative airway pressure for adequate peripheral oxyhaemoglobin saturation. The primary outcome was the prevalence of SSI within the first 7 postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were composites of systemic complications, length of intensive care and hospital stay, and 6-month mortality. Results: We enrolled 740 subjects: 371 in the high FIO2 group and 369 in the low FIO2 group. Data from 717 subjects were available for final analysis. The rate of SSI during the first postoperative week did not differ between high (8.9%) and low (9.4%) FIO2 groups (relative risk [RR]: 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.50; P=0.90]). Secondary outcomes, such as atelectasis (7.7% vs 9.8%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.48-1.25; P=0.38) and myocardial ischaemia (0.6% [n=2] vs 0% [n=0]; P=0.47) did not differ between groups. Conclusions: An oxygenation strategy using high FIO2 compared with conventional FIO2 did not reduce postoperative SSIs in abdominal surgery. No differences in secondary outcomes or adverse events were found.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale and study design for an individualized perioperative open lung ventilatory strategy (iPROVE) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Trials. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1745-6215. ; 16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Postoperative pulmonary and non-pulmonary complications are common problems that increase morbidity and mortality in surgical patients, even though the incidence has decreased with the increased use of protective lung ventilation strategies. Previous trials have focused on standard strategies in the intraoperative or postoperative period, but without personalizing these strategies to suit the needs of each individual patient and without considering both these periods as a global perioperative lung-protective approach. The trial presented here aims at comparing postoperative complications when using an individualized ventilatory management strategy in the intraoperative and immediate postoperative periods with those when using a standard protective ventilation strategy in patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery. Methods: This is a comparative, prospective, multicenter, randomized, and controlled, four-arm trial that will include 1012 patients with an intermediate or high risk for postoperative pulmonary complications. The patients will be divided into four groups: (1) individualized perioperative group: intra-and postoperative individualized strategy; (2) intraoperative individualized strategy + postoperative continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP); (3) intraoperative standard ventilation + postoperative CPAP; (4) intra-and postoperative standard strategy (conventional strategy). The primary outcome is a composite analysis of postoperative complications. Discussion: The Individualized Perioperative Open-lung Ventilatory Strategy (iPROVE) is the first multicenter, randomized, and controlled trial to investigate whether an individualized perioperative approach prevents postoperative pulmonary complications.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
A noninvasive postoperative clinical score to identify patients at risk for postoperative pulmonary complications : the Air-Test Score
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Minerva Anestesiologica. - : EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA. - 0375-9393 .- 1827-1596. ; 86:4, s. 404-415
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) negatively affect morbidity, healthcare costs and postsurgical survival. Preoperative and intraoperative peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO(2)) levels are independent risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The air-test assesses the value of SpO(2) while breathing room-air. We aimed at building a clinical score that includes the air-test for predicting the risk for PPCs. METHODS: This is a development and validation study in patients -randomly divided into two cohorts- from a large randomized clinical trial (iPROVE) that enrolled 964 intermediate-to-high risk patients scheduled for abdominal surgery. Arterial oxygenation was assessed on room-air in the preoperative period (preoperative air-test) and 3h after admission to the postoperative care unit (postoperative air-test). The air-test was defined as positive or negative if SpO(2) was <= 96% or >96%, respectively. Positive air-tests were stratified into weak (93-96%) or strong (<93%). The primary outcome was a composite of moderate-to-severe PPCs during the first seven postoperative days. RESULTS: A total of 902 patients were included in the final analysis (542 in the development cohort and 360 in the validation cohort). Regression analysis identified five independent risk factors for PPC: age. type of surgery, pre- and postoperative air-test, and atelectasis. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75-0.82) when including these five independent predictors. We built a simplified score termed "air-test score" by using only the pre- and postoperative SpO(2) , resulting in an AUC of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67-0.76) for the derivation and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.66-0.78) for the validation cohort, respectively. The air-test score stratified patients into four levels of risk, with PPCs ranging from <15% to >75%. CONCLUSIONS: The simple, non-invasive and inexpensive bedside air-test score, evaluating pre- and postoperatively SpO(2) measured on room-air, helps to predict the risk for PPCs.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Individualised, perioperative open-lung ventilation strategy during one-lung ventilation (iPROVE-OLV) : a multicentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. - : Elsevier. - 2213-2600 .- 2213-2619. ; 12:3, s. 195-206
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background It is uncertain whether individualisation of the perioperative open-lung approach (OLA) to ventilation reduces postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing lung resection. We compared a perioperative individualised OLA (iOLA) ventilation strategy with standard lung-protective ventilation in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with one-lung ventilation. Methods This multicentre, randomised controlled trial enrolled patients scheduled for open or video-assisted thoracic surgery using one-lung ventilation in 25 participating hospitals in Spain, Italy, Turkey, Egypt, and Ecuador. Eligible adult patients (age >= 18 years) were randomly assigned to receive iOLA or standard lung-protective ventilation. Eligible patients (stratified by centre) were randomly assigned online by local principal investigators, with an allocation ratio of 1:1. Treatment with iOLA included an alveolar recruitment manoeuvre to 40 cm H2O of end-inspiratory pressure followed by individualised positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titrated to best respiratory system compliance, and individualised postoperative respiratory support with high-flow oxygen therapy. Participants allocated to standard lungprotective ventilation received combined intraoperative 4 cm H2O of PEEP and postoperative conventional oxygen therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of severe postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days, including atelectasis requiring bronchoscopy, severe respiratory failure, contralateral pneumothorax, early extubation failure (rescue with continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation, or reintubation), acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary infection, bronchopleural fistula, and pleural empyema. Due to trial setting, data obtained in the operating and postoperative rooms for routine monitoring were not blinded. At 24 h, data were acquired by an investigator blinded to group allocation. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03182062, and is complete. Findings Between Sept 11, 2018, and June 14, 2022, we enrolled 1380 patients, of whom 1308 eligible patients (670 [434 male, 233 female, and three with missing data] assigned to iOLA and 638 [395 male, 237 female, and six with missing data] to standard lung-protective ventilation) were included in the final analysis. The proportion of patients with the composite outcome of severe postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days was lower in the iOLA group compared with the standard lung-protective ventilation group (40 [6%] vs 97 [15%], relative risk 0 center dot 39 [95% CI 0 center dot 28 to 0 center dot 56]), with an absolute risk difference of -9 center dot 23 (95% CI -12 center dot 55 to -5 center dot 92). Recruitment manoeuvre-related adverse events were reported in five patients. Interpretation Among patients subjected to lung resection under one-lung ventilation, iOLA was associated with a reduced risk of severe postoperative pulmonary complications when compared with conventional lung-protective ventilation. Funding Instituto de Salud Carlos III and the European Regional Development Funds. Copyright (c) 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Intraoperative open lung condition and postoperative pulmonary complications. A secondary analysis of iPROVE and iPROVE-O2 trials
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 66:1, s. 30-39
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The preventive role of an intraoperative recruitment maneuver plus open lung approach (RM + OLA) ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) remains unclear. We aimed at investigating whether an intraoperative open lung condition reduces the risk of developing a composite of PPCs.Methods Post hoc analysis of two randomized controlled trials including patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Patients were classified according to the intraoperative lung condition as "open" (OL) or "non-open" (NOL) if PaO2/FIO2 ratio was >= or <400 mmHg, respectively. We used a multivariable logistic regression model that included potential confounders selected with directed acyclic graphs (DAG) using Dagitty software built with variables that were considered clinically relevant based on biological mechanism or evidence from previously published data. PPCs included severe acute respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and pneumonia.Results A total of 1480 patients were included in the final analysis, with 718 (49%) classified as OL. The rate of severe PPCs during the first seven postoperative days was 6.0% (7.9% in the NOL and 4.4% in the OL group, p = .007). OL was independently associated with a lower risk for severe PPCs during the first 7 and 30 postoperative days [odds ratio of 0.58 (95% CI 0.34-0.99, p = .04) and 0.56 (95% CI 0.34-0.94, p = .03), respectively].Conclusions An intraoperative open lung condition was associated with a reduced risk of developing severe PPCs in intermediate-to-high risk patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Trial registration: Registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT02158923 (iPROVE), NCT02776046 (iPROVE-O2).
|
|
| 8. |
- Ferrando, Carlos, et al.
(författare)
-
Open lung approach versus standard protective strategies : Effects on driving pressure and ventilatory efficiency during anesthesia - A pilot, randomized controlled trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1932-6203. ; 12:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Low tidal volume (VT) during anesthesia minimizes lung injury but may be associated to a decrease in functional lung volume impairing lung mechanics and efficiency. Lung recruitment (RM) can restore lung volume but this may critically depend on the post-RM selected PEEP. This study was a randomized, two parallel arm, open study whose primary outcome was to compare the effects on driving pressure of adding a RM to low-VT ventilation, with or without an individualized post-RM PEEP in patients without known previous lung disease during anesthesia.Methods: Consecutive patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were submitted to low-VT ventilation (6 ml.kg(-1)) and standard PEEP of 5 cmH(2)O (pre-RM, n = 36). After 30 min estabilization all patients received a RM and were randomly allocated to either continue with the same PEEP (RM-5 group, n = 18) or to an individualized open-lung PEEP (OL-PEEP) (Open Lung Approach, OLA group, n = 18) defined as the level resulting in maximal Cdyn during a decremental PEEP trial. We compared the effects on driving pressure and lung efficiency measured by volumetric capnography.Results: OL-PEEP was found at 8 +/- 2 cmH(2)O. 36 patients were included in the final analysis. When compared with pre-RM, OLA resulted in a 22% increase in compliance and a 28% decrease in driving pressure when compared to pre-RM. These parameters did not improve in the RM-5. The trend of the DP was significantly different between the OLA and RM-5 groups (p = 0.002). VDalv/VTalv was significantly lower in the OLA group after the RM (p = 0.035).Conclusions: Lung recruitment applied during low-VT ventilation improves driving pressure and lung efficiency only when applied as an open-lung strategy with an individualized PEEP in patients without lung diseases undergoing major abdominal surgery.
|
|
