Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract Background Post-operative pulmonary complications (PPC) can develop in up to 13% of patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures and may adversely affect clinical outcome. The use of intraoperative lung protective ventilation (LPV) strategies, usually including the use of a low Vt, low PEEP...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Federico Longhini, Laura Pasin, Claudia Montagnini, Petra Konrad, Andrea Bruni, Eugenio Garofalo, Paolo Murabito, Corrado Pelaia, Valentina Rondi, Fabrizio Dellapiazza, Gianmaria Cammarota, Rosanna Vaschetto, Marcus J. Schultz, Paolo Navalesi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-06-01
Series:BMC Anesthesiology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01404-8
id doaj-e7effa40bf5b404189cdb8c9fec021de
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Federico Longhini
Laura Pasin
Claudia Montagnini
Petra Konrad
Andrea Bruni
Eugenio Garofalo
Paolo Murabito
Corrado Pelaia
Valentina Rondi
Fabrizio Dellapiazza
Gianmaria Cammarota
Rosanna Vaschetto
Marcus J. Schultz
Paolo Navalesi
spellingShingle Federico Longhini
Laura Pasin
Claudia Montagnini
Petra Konrad
Andrea Bruni
Eugenio Garofalo
Paolo Murabito
Corrado Pelaia
Valentina Rondi
Fabrizio Dellapiazza
Gianmaria Cammarota
Rosanna Vaschetto
Marcus J. Schultz
Paolo Navalesi
Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
BMC Anesthesiology
Mechanical ventilation
Postoperative pulmonary complications
Neurosurgery
author_facet Federico Longhini
Laura Pasin
Claudia Montagnini
Petra Konrad
Andrea Bruni
Eugenio Garofalo
Paolo Murabito
Corrado Pelaia
Valentina Rondi
Fabrizio Dellapiazza
Gianmaria Cammarota
Rosanna Vaschetto
Marcus J. Schultz
Paolo Navalesi
author_sort Federico Longhini
title Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
title_short Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
title_full Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
title_sort intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trial
publisher BMC
series BMC Anesthesiology
issn 1471-2253
publishDate 2021-06-01
description Abstract Background Post-operative pulmonary complications (PPC) can develop in up to 13% of patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures and may adversely affect clinical outcome. The use of intraoperative lung protective ventilation (LPV) strategies, usually including the use of a low Vt, low PEEP and low plateau pressure, seem to reduce the risk of PPC and are strongly recommended in almost all surgical procedures. Nonetheless, feasibility of LPV strategies in neurosurgical patients are still debated because the use of low Vt during LPV might result in hypercapnia with detrimental effects on cerebrovascular physiology. Aim of our study was to determine whether LPV strategies would be feasible compared with a control group in adult patients undergoing cranial or spinal surgery. Methods This single-centre, pilot randomized clinical trial was conducted at the University Hospital “Maggiore della Carità” (Novara, Italy). Adult patients undergoing major cerebral or spinal neurosurgical interventions with risk index for pulmonary post-operative complications > 2 and not expected to need post-operative intensive care unit (ICU) admission were considered eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to either LPV (Vt = 6 ml/kg of ideal body weight (IBW), respiratory rate initially set at 16 breaths/min, PEEP at 5 cmH2O and application of a recruitment manoeuvre (RM) immediately after intubation and at every disconnection from the ventilator) or control treatment (Vt = 10 ml/kg of IBW, respiratory rate initially set at 6–8 breaths/min, no PEEP and no RM). Primary outcomes of the study were intraoperative adverse events, the level of cerebral tension at dura opening and the intraoperative control of PaCO2. Secondary outcomes were the rate of pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications, the number of unplanned ICU admissions, ICU and hospital lengths of stay and mortality. Results A total of 60 patients, 30 for each group, were randomized. During brain surgery, the number of episodes of intraoperative hypercapnia and grade of cerebral tension were similar between patients randomized to receive control or LPV strategies. No difference in the rate of intraoperative adverse events was found between groups. The rate of postoperative pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications and major clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Conclusions LPV strategies in patients undergoing major neurosurgical intervention are feasible. Larger clinical trials are needed to assess their role in postoperative clinical outcome improvements. Trial registration registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ( www.anzctr.org.au ), registration number ACTRN12615000707561.
topic Mechanical ventilation
Postoperative pulmonary complications
Neurosurgery
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01404-8
work_keys_str_mv AT federicolonghini intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT laurapasin intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT claudiamontagnini intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT petrakonrad intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT andreabruni intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT eugeniogarofalo intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT paolomurabito intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT corradopelaia intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT valentinarondi intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT fabriziodellapiazza intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT gianmariacammarota intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT rosannavaschetto intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT marcusjschultz intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT paolonavalesi intraoperativeprotectiveventilationinpatientsundergoingmajorneurosurgicalinterventionsarandomizedclinicaltrial
_version_ 1721320579458400256
spelling doaj-e7effa40bf5b404189cdb8c9fec021de2021-07-04T11:13:19ZengBMCBMC Anesthesiology1471-22532021-06-0121111010.1186/s12871-021-01404-8Intraoperative protective ventilation in patients undergoing major neurosurgical interventions: a randomized clinical trialFederico Longhini0Laura Pasin1Claudia Montagnini2Petra Konrad3Andrea Bruni4Eugenio Garofalo5Paolo Murabito6Corrado Pelaia7Valentina Rondi8Fabrizio Dellapiazza9Gianmaria Cammarota10Rosanna Vaschetto11Marcus J. Schultz12Paolo Navalesi13Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, “Magna Graecia” UniversityAnesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital of PaduaAnesthesia and Intensive Care, “Maggiore Della Carità” HospitalAnesthesia and Intensive Care, “Maggiore Della Carità” HospitalAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, “Magna Graecia” UniversityAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, “Magna Graecia” UniversityDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of CataniaAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, “Magna Graecia” UniversityAnesthesia and Intensive Care, “Maggiore Della Carità” HospitalAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Sant’Andrea Hospital, ASL VCAnesthesia and Intensive Care, “Maggiore Della Carità” HospitalAnesthesia and Intensive Care, “Maggiore Della Carità” HospitalDepartment of Intensive Care, Academic Medical CenterAnesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital of PaduaAbstract Background Post-operative pulmonary complications (PPC) can develop in up to 13% of patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures and may adversely affect clinical outcome. The use of intraoperative lung protective ventilation (LPV) strategies, usually including the use of a low Vt, low PEEP and low plateau pressure, seem to reduce the risk of PPC and are strongly recommended in almost all surgical procedures. Nonetheless, feasibility of LPV strategies in neurosurgical patients are still debated because the use of low Vt during LPV might result in hypercapnia with detrimental effects on cerebrovascular physiology. Aim of our study was to determine whether LPV strategies would be feasible compared with a control group in adult patients undergoing cranial or spinal surgery. Methods This single-centre, pilot randomized clinical trial was conducted at the University Hospital “Maggiore della Carità” (Novara, Italy). Adult patients undergoing major cerebral or spinal neurosurgical interventions with risk index for pulmonary post-operative complications > 2 and not expected to need post-operative intensive care unit (ICU) admission were considered eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to either LPV (Vt = 6 ml/kg of ideal body weight (IBW), respiratory rate initially set at 16 breaths/min, PEEP at 5 cmH2O and application of a recruitment manoeuvre (RM) immediately after intubation and at every disconnection from the ventilator) or control treatment (Vt = 10 ml/kg of IBW, respiratory rate initially set at 6–8 breaths/min, no PEEP and no RM). Primary outcomes of the study were intraoperative adverse events, the level of cerebral tension at dura opening and the intraoperative control of PaCO2. Secondary outcomes were the rate of pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications, the number of unplanned ICU admissions, ICU and hospital lengths of stay and mortality. Results A total of 60 patients, 30 for each group, were randomized. During brain surgery, the number of episodes of intraoperative hypercapnia and grade of cerebral tension were similar between patients randomized to receive control or LPV strategies. No difference in the rate of intraoperative adverse events was found between groups. The rate of postoperative pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications and major clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Conclusions LPV strategies in patients undergoing major neurosurgical intervention are feasible. Larger clinical trials are needed to assess their role in postoperative clinical outcome improvements. Trial registration registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ( www.anzctr.org.au ), registration number ACTRN12615000707561.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01404-8Mechanical ventilationPostoperative pulmonary complicationsNeurosurgery