European Society of Anaesthesiology.

IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H 2 O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H 2 O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with SpO 2 Յ92% for >1 minute). RESULTS Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, −2.3% [95% CI, −5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P = .23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, −8.6% [95% CI, −11.1% to 6.1%]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications.

No abstract

Background and objectivesThe gold standard for the treatment of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is the epidural blood patch (EBP). Regional techniques—sphenopalatine ganglion block (SPGB), greater occipital nerve block (GONB) and trigger point infiltration (TPI)—can also be used for the treatment of PDPH. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy of these peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) in the treatment of PDPH.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted including all patients with PDPH in the obstetrics department of our institution between April 2016 and December 2017. Data were retrieved from clinical records regarding anesthetic technique, symptoms, treatment, Numeric Pain Score (NPS) before and after treatment, among others.ResultsWe observed 50 cases of PDPH: 25 following spinal anesthesia, 19 following epidural block and 6 following combined spinal-epidural. Of these, seven were managed conservatively and one received EBP as first-line treatment. The remaining 42 patients received PNB as first-line treatment. Of these, 27 received only 1 course of PNB, while 15 received 2 courses. We observed a statistically significant improvement in the NPS after the first course of blocks (n=42), with a reduction of the median NPS by 6.0 (IQR 4.0–7.5; p<0.001). Improvement was also observed after the second course of blocks (n=15), with a reduction of the median NPS of 3.5 (IQR 1.5–5.0; p=0.02). Due to treatment failure, 9 of the 42 patients treated with PNB required EBP. None of these were cases following spinal anesthesia.ConclusionSPGB, GONB and TPI can be safe and effective options for treatment of PDPH, but do not completely eliminate the need for EBP. Prospective studies designed to identify factors associated with unsuccessful treatment are required.

This article aims to problematize the interaction between Family and Community Medicine and the supplementary health system (private healthcare services and private health plans) in Brazil's current scenario. The point of departure is a historical contextualization, proceeding to some central aspects in this movement. In the history of health policies in Brazil before and after the creation of the Unified National Health System (SUS), one of the greatest challenges has been public-private relations. This process shaped a field of interests, actors, and disputes that weaken the possibilities for achieving health as a civil right and the SUS as a social policy of the State 1. While arguments indicate that inclusion of the private sector in health was a condition for the approval of the chapter on health in the 1988 Federal Constitution 2 , different forms of incentives have been granted by the state to the private sector, while major underfunding still exists in the SUS 3. Added to this is the symbolic and imaginary construction in Brazilian society, positively valuing the private health sector to the detriment of the public sector. Primary healthcare (PHC) has been one of the key strategies in the implementation of the SUS, considering the guarantee of universal access. The principal model instituted in 1994 was the Family Health Program, later reconceptualized as the Family Health Strategy (ESF in Portuguese). The ESF was expanded and improved in the subsequent decades and currently has 42,000 teams (with general medical practitioners, nurses, nurse technicians, and community health agents), covering 63% of Brazil's territory 4. In addition to internationally acknowledged attributes such as access and first contact, comprehensiveness, continuity over time, and coordination of care 5 , Brazil's PHC also features multidisciplinary teamwork and a strong territorial approach. This is seen in the population's modes of enrollment in the system, in the approach to collective health problems and risks, and in the community health agents 6. The main challenges in the history of the implementation of the ESF have been training, distribution, hiring, pay scales, and development of health professionals, especially physicians 7. In this sense, although Family and Community Medicine has existed in Brazil since the 1970s 8 , more intensely since 2011 9 , national policies were formulated that targeted the physician workforce in PHC. The More Doctors Program (PMM in Portuguese), with its components of emergency provision and training (undergraduate medical education and residency) was quite emblematic, with a central focus on Family and Community Medicine in national law and on the government agenda 7,10 .