Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure/recruitment manoeuvres compared with zero end-expiratory pressure on atelectasis during open gynaecological surgery as assessed by ultrasonography: a randomised controlled trial

• Published in: British journal of anaesthesia : BJA Vol. 124; no. 1; pp. 101 - 109
• Main Authors: Généreux, Vincent, Chassé, Michaël, Girard, François, Massicotte, Nathalie, Chartrand-Lefebvre, Carl, Girard, Martin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.01.2020
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anesthesia, General; atelectasis; Female; general anaesthesia; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects; Humans; intraoperative care; Intraoperative Complications - diagnostic imaging; Intraoperative Complications - epidemiology; Lung - diagnostic imaging; Middle Aged; positive-pressure respiration; Positive-Pressure Respiration - methods; Postoperative Complications - diagnostic imaging; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; postoperative pulmonary complications; Prospective Studies; Pulmonary Atelectasis - diagnostic imaging; Pulmonary Atelectasis - epidemiology; Pulmonary Atelectasis - etiology; Respiration, Artificial; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography; intraoperative care; positive-pressure respiration; postoperative pulmonary complications; atelectasis; ultrasonography; general anaesthesia
• ISSN: 0007-0912; 1471-6771; 1471-6771
• DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.09.040

During general anaesthesia, most patients develop atelectasis, which promotes postoperative pulmonary complications. RCTs that investigated perioperative lung protection have failed to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications consistently. Ultrasound imaging could help confirm the effects of different protective ventilatory strategies, but this has not been tested in trials. The objective of this study was to use ultrasonography to evaluate whether lung-protective ventilation measures reduce perioperative atelectasis. We conducted a prospective, randomised patient- and assessor-blinded controlled trial in women undergoing open gynaecological surgery. Subjects were randomised to either lung protection or zero end-expiratory pressure (ZEEP; with no recruitment manoeuvres [RMs]). Lung protection entailed PEEP (7 cm H2O) and RMs every 30 min. Lung ultrasonography was undertaken at five predefined time points. The primary outcome was the difference in lung ultrasonography score (LUS) between groups before emergence; a lower LUS indicates better lung aeration. We recruited 45 women (34–85 yr old). Women randomised to lung protection had lower mean (standard deviation) LUS before emergence (6.1 [3.7]), compared with women randomised to ZEEP (11.7 [3.9]; 95% confidence interval for the difference between group means [–7.9 to –3.2]; P<0.0001). This difference did not persist after extubation, with similar mean LUSs in women who had received intraoperative lung protection (7.0 [4.1]), compared with women randomised to receive ZEEP (7.7 [3.1]). As assessed by lung ultrasonography, intraoperative PEEP/RMs decreased aeration loss during general anaesthesia. However, similar degrees of aeration loss were observed after tracheal extubation regardless of intraoperative ventilatory strategy. NCT02055807.