医学
麻醉
通风(建筑)
围手术期
高原压力
潮气量
俯卧位
机械通风
随机对照试验
外科
呼气末正压
呼吸系统
内科学
机械工程
工程类
作者
Di Jin,Huayue Liu,Xiaoqi Kong,Guangle Wei,Ke Peng,Cheng Ho,Fu-hai Ji
标识
DOI:10.1080/08941939.2022.2107250
摘要
Prolonged spinal surgery in the prone position may lead to postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). We aimed to compare the effects of driving pressure-guided ventilation versus conventional protective ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing spinal surgery in the prone position. We hypothesized that driving pressure-guided ventilation would be associated with a decreased incidence of PPC.We enrolled 78 patients into this single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. The driving pressure (DP) group (n = 40) received a tidal volume of 6 ml/kg of predicted body weight, individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) which produced the lowest driving pressure (plateau pressure-PEEP), and a recruitment maneuver. The protective ventilation (PV) group (n = 38) received the same tidal volume and recruitment maneuver but with a fixed PEEP of 5 cm H2O. Our primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications based on Lung Ultrasound Scores (LUS) at the end of the surgery and the simplified Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (sCPIS) on postoperative days (POD) 1 and 3.DP patients had lower LUS and POD1 sCPIS than the PV group (p < 0.01). DP patients had lower driving pressure during the surgery than PV patients (p < 0.01). Perioperative arterial blood gases and hemodynamic parameters were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). The visual pain score (VAS) in postoperative days, drainage, and lengths of stay (LOS) were also similar between the two groups (p > 0.05).Driving pressure-guided ventilation during spinal surgery with a prolonged prone patient position may reduce the incidence of early postoperative pulmonary complications, compared with conventional protective ventilation.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI