Intraabdominal Pressure Targeted Positive End-expiratory Pressure during Laparoscopic Surgery
| Autor: | Lorenzo Ball, Nuria Garcia-Gregorio, Marcus J. Schultz, Javier Maupoey, Begoña Ayas-Montero, Paolo Pelosi, Marcelo Gama de Abreu, Guido Mazzinari, Ary Serpa Neto, Oscar Diaz-Cambronero, Jose Luis Ibañez, Maria Pilar Argente Navarro, Jose Miguel Alonso-Iñigo |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Laparoscopic surgery
business.industry medicine.medical_treatment medicine.disease Crossover study Clinical trial 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine 030228 respiratory system Pneumoperitoneum 030202 anesthesiology Anesthesia Medicine Intraabdominal pressure Respiratory system Open label business Positive end-expiratory pressure |
| Zdroj: | Anesthesiology. 132:667-677 |
| ISSN: | 0003-3022 |
| Popis: | Background Pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery is associated with a rise of driving pressure. The authors aimed to assess the effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on driving pressure at varying intraabdominal pressure levels. It was hypothesized that PEEP attenuates pneumoperitoneum-related rises in driving pressure. Methods Open-label, nonrandomized, crossover, clinical trial in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. “Targeted PEEP” (2 cm H2O above intraabdominal pressure) was compared with “standard PEEP” (5 cm H2O), with respect to the transpulmonary and respiratory system driving pressure at three predefined intraabdominal pressure levels, and each patient was ventilated with two levels of PEEP at the three intraabdominal pressure levels in the same sequence. The primary outcome was the difference in transpulmonary driving pressure between targeted PEEP and standard PEEP at the three levels of intraabdominal pressure. Results Thirty patients were included and analyzed. Targeted PEEP was 10, 14, and 17 cm H2O at intraabdominal pressure of 8, 12, and 15 mmHg, respectively. Compared to standard PEEP, targeted PEEP resulted in lower median transpulmonary driving pressure at intraabdominal pressure of 8 mmHg (7 [5 to 8] vs. 9 [7 to 11] cm H2O; P = 0.010; difference 2 [95% CI 0.5 to 4 cm H2O]); 12 mmHg (7 [4 to 9] vs.10 [7 to 12] cm H2O; P = 0.002; difference 3 [1 to 5] cm H2O); and 15 mmHg (7 [6 to 9] vs.12 [8 to 15] cm H2O; P < 0.001; difference 4 [2 to 6] cm H2O). The effects of targeted PEEP compared to standard PEEP on respiratory system driving pressure were comparable to the effects on transpulmonary driving pressure, though respiratory system driving pressure was higher than transpulmonary driving pressure at all intraabdominal pressure levels. Conclusions Transpulmonary driving pressure rises with an increase in intraabdominal pressure, an effect that can be counterbalanced by targeted PEEP. Future studies have to elucidate which combination of PEEP and intraabdominal pressure is best in term of clinical outcomes. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|