Abstract

Although mechanical ventilation is a life-saving strategy in critically ill patients and an indispensable tool in patients under general anesthesia for surgery, it also acts as a double-edged sword. Indeed, ventilation is increasingly recognized as a potentially dangerous intrusion that has the potential to harm lungs, in a condition known as ‘ventilator-induced lung injury’ (VILI). So-called ‘lung-protective’ ventilator settings aiming at prevention of VILI have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and, over the last few years, there has been increasing interest in possible benefit of lung-protective ventilation in patients under ventilation for reasons other than ARDS. Patients without ARDS could benefit from tidal volume reduction during mechanical ventilation. However, it is uncertain whether higher levels of positive end-expiratory pressure could benefit these patients as well. Finally, recent evidence suggests that patients without ARDS should receive low driving pressures during ventilation.

Highlights

  • Introduction mechanical ventilation is a life-saving strategy in critically ill patients and an indispensable tool in patients under general anesthesia for surgery, it acts as a double-edged sword[1]

  • -called ‘lung-protective’ ventilator settings aiming at prevention of ventilator-induced lung injury’ (VILI) have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)[4]

  • This study showed a better outcome of brain injury patients who received ventilation with low driving pressures

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Mechanical ventilation is a life-saving strategy in critically ill patients and an indispensable tool in patients under general anesthesia for surgery, it acts as a double-edged sword[1]. Most evidence of benefit of ventilation with low driving pressures in patients with uninjured lungs comes from one individual patient data meta-analysis of studies in surgery patients receiving intraoperative ventilation[48]. This analysis shows an independent association between absolute driving pressures and the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications and between changes in driving pressure due to changes in PEEP and occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications. The ‘Driving Pressure during General Anesthesia for Abdominal surgery’ (DESIGNATION) study will test whether a PEEP titration aiming at the lowest driving pressure possible during surgery, compared with a standard PEEP of 5 cm H2O, decreases the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at risk for postoperative pulmonary complications and undergoing abdominal surgery

Conclusions
22. Marini JJ
35. Corporacion Parc Tauli
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call