Dharshi Karalapillai1,2, Laurence Weinberg1, Philip Peyton1, Louise Ellard1, Raymond Hu1, Brett Pearce1, Chong O Tan1, David Story3, Mark O'Donnell1, Patrick Hamilton1, Chad Oughton1, Jonathan Galtieri1, Anthony Wilson1, Ary Serpa Neto4,5,6,7, Glenn Eastwood2, Rinaldo Bellomo2,4,7, Daryl A Jones1,7. 1. Department of Anesthesia, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Department of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Department of Anesthesia, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil. 6. Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 7. Data Analytics Research and Evaluation (DARE) Centre, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
Importance: In patients who undergo mechanical ventilation during surgery, the ideal tidal volume is unclear. Objective: To determine whether low-tidal-volume ventilation compared with conventional ventilation during major surgery decreases postoperative pulmonary complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial of 1236 patients older than 40 years undergoing major noncardiothoracic, nonintracranial surgery under general anesthesia lasting more than 2 hours in a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia, from February 2015 to February 2019. The last date of follow-up was February 17, 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive a tidal volume of 6 mL/kgpredicted body weight (n = 614; low tidal volume group) or a tidal volume of 10 mL/kg predicted body weight (n = 592; conventional tidal volume group). All patients received positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) at 5 cm H2O. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days, including pneumonia, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pulmonary congestion, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or unplanned requirement for postoperative invasive or noninvasive ventilation. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pulmonary complications including development of pulmonary embolism, acute respiratory distress syndrome, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, acute kidney injury, wound infection (superficial and deep), rate of intraoperative need for vasopressor, incidence of unplanned intensive care unit admission, rate of need for rapid response team call, intensive care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 1236 patients who were randomized, 1206 (98.9%) completed the trial (mean age, 63.5 years; 494 [40.9%] women; 681 [56.4%] undergoing abdominal surgery). The primary outcome occurred in 231 of 608 patients (38%) in the low tidal volume group compared with 232 of 590 patients (39%) in the conventional tidal volume group (difference, -1.3% [95% CI, -6.8% to 4.2%]; risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.84-1.11]; P = .64). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adult patients undergoingmajor surgery, intraoperative ventilation with low tidal volume compared with conventional tidal volume, with PEEP applied equally between groups, did not significantly reduce pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12614000790640.
RCT Entities:
Importance: In patients who undergo mechanical ventilation during surgery, the ideal tidal volume is unclear. Objective: To determine whether low-tidal-volume ventilation compared with conventional ventilation during major surgery decreases postoperative pulmonary complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial of 1236 patients older than 40 years undergoing major noncardiothoracic, nonintracranial surgery under general anesthesia lasting more than 2 hours in a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia, from February 2015 to February 2019. The last date of follow-up was February 17, 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive a tidal volume of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight (n = 614; low tidal volume group) or a tidal volume of 10 mL/kg predicted body weight (n = 592; conventional tidal volume group). All patients received positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) at 5 cm H2O. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days, including pneumonia, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pulmonary congestion, respiratory failure, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or unplanned requirement for postoperative invasive or noninvasive ventilation. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pulmonary complications including development of pulmonary embolism, acute respiratory distress syndrome, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, acute kidney injury, wound infection (superficial and deep), rate of intraoperative need for vasopressor, incidence of unplanned intensive care unit admission, rate of need for rapid response team call, intensive care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 1236 patients who were randomized, 1206 (98.9%) completed the trial (mean age, 63.5 years; 494 [40.9%] women; 681 [56.4%] undergoing abdominal surgery). The primary outcome occurred in 231 of 608 patients (38%) in the low tidal volume group compared with 232 of 590 patients (39%) in the conventional tidal volume group (difference, -1.3% [95% CI, -6.8% to 4.2%]; risk ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.84-1.11]; P = .64). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adult patients undergoing major surgery, intraoperative ventilation with low tidal volume compared with conventional tidal volume, with PEEP applied equally between groups, did not significantly reduce pulmonary complications within the first 7 postoperative days. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12614000790640.
Authors: Dharshi Karalapillai; Laurence Weinberg; Phil Peyton; Louise Ellard; Raymond Hu; Brett Pearce; Chong Tan; David Story; Mark ODonnell; Patrick Hamilton; Chad Oughton; Jonathan Galtieri; Anthony Wilson; Ary Serpa Neto; Glenn Eastwood; Rinaldo Bellomo; Daryl A Jones Journal: Crit Care Resusc Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Roy G Brower; Michael A Matthay; Alan Morris; David Schoenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Arthur Wheeler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-05-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti; Érica Aranha Suzumura; Ligia Nasi Laranjeira; Denise de Moraes Paisani; Lucas Petri Damiani; Helio Penna Guimarães; Edson Renato Romano; Marisa de Moraes Regenga; Luzia Noriko Takahashi Taniguchi; Cassiano Teixeira; Roselaine Pinheiro de Oliveira; Flavia Ribeiro Machado; Fredi Alexander Diaz-Quijano; Meton Soares de Alencar Filho; Israel Silva Maia; Eliana Bernardete Caser; Wilson de Oliveira Filho; Marcos de Carvalho Borges; Priscilla de Aquino Martins; Mirna Matsui; Gustavo Adolfo Ospina-Tascón; Thiago Simões Giancursi; Nelson Dario Giraldo-Ramirez; Silvia Regina Rios Vieira; Maria da Graça Pasquotto de Lima Assef; Mohd Shahnaz Hasan; Wojciech Szczeklik; Fernando Rios; Marcelo Britto Passos Amato; Otávio Berwanger; Carlos Roberto Ribeiro de Carvalho Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Dharshi Karalapillai; Laurence Weinberg; Ary Serpa Neto; Philip J Peyton; Louise Ellard; Raymond Hu; Brett Pearce; Chong Tan; David Story; Mark O'Donnell; Patrick Hamilton; Chad Oughton; Jonathan Galtieri; Sree Appu; Anthony Wilson; Glenn Eastwood; Rinaldo Bellomo; Daryl A Jones Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 2.376
Authors: Douglas A Colquhoun; Aleda M Leis; Amy M Shanks; Michael R Mathis; Bhiken I Naik; Marcel E Durieux; Sachin Kheterpal; Nathan L Pace; Wanda M Popescu; Robert B Schonberger; Benjamin D Kozower; Dustin M Walters; Justin D Blasberg; Andrew C Chang; Michael F Aziz; Izumi Harukuni; Brandon H Tieu; Randal S Blank Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Dharshi Karalapillai; Laurence Weinberg; Serpa Neto A; Philip Peyton; Louise Ellard; Raymond Hu; Brett Pearce; Chong O Tan; David Story; Mark O'Donnell; Patrick Hamilton; Chad Oughton; Jonathan Galtieri; Anthony Wilson; Glenn Eastwood; Rinaldo Bellomo; Daryl A Jones Journal: Eur J Anaesthesiol Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 4.330