No abstract

During one-lung ventilation, the improvements in oxygenation and lung mechanics after an alveolar recruitment maneuver were better preserved by ventilation by using individualized PEEP with a PEEP decrement trial than with a standardized 5 cm·H2O of PEEP.

Background: We aimed to examine whether using a high fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO 2 ) 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) FIO 2 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 FIO 2 group and 369 in the low FIO 2 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%) FIO 2 groups (relative risk [RR]: 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59e1.50; P¼0.90]). Secondary outcomes, such as atelectasis (7.7% vs 9.8%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.48e1.25; P¼0.38) and myocardial ischaemia (0.6% [n¼2] vs 0% [n¼0]; P¼0.47) did not differ between groups. Conclusions: An oxygenation strategy using high FIO 2 compared with conventional FIO 2 did not reduce postoperative SSIs in abdominal surgery. No differences in secondary outcomes or adverse events were found. Clinical trial registration: NCT02776046.

BackgroundLow 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.MethodsConsecutive patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were submitted to low-VT ventilation (6 ml·kg-1) and standard PEEP of 5 cmH2O (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.ResultsOL-PEEP was found at 8±2 cmH2O. 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).ConclusionsLung 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.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02798133

The management of coronary patients scheduled for a coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), who are receiving one or more antiplatelet drugs, is plenty of controversies. It has been shown that withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs is associated with an increased risk of a thrombotic event, but surgery under an altered platelet function also means an increased risk of bleeding in the perioperative period. Because of the conflict recommendations, this review article tries to evaluate the outcome of different perioperative antiplatelet protocols in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing CABG.