Application of intraoperative lung-protective ventilation varies in accordance with the knowledge of anaesthesiologists: a single-Centre questionnaire study and a retrospective observational study

Improving Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists' Adherence to a Standardized Intraoperative Lung Protective Ventilation Protocol

PURPOSE

The use of lung protective ventilation (LPV) during general anesthesia is an effective strategy among certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) to reduce and prevent the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications. The purpose of this project was to implement a LPV protocol, assess CRNA provider adherence, and investigate differences in ventilation parameters and postoperative oxygen requirements.

DESIGN

This quality improvement project was conducted using a pre- and postimplementation design.

METHODS

Sixty patients undergoing robotic laparoscopic abdominal surgery and 35 CRNAs at a community hospital participated. An evidence-based intraoperative LPV protocol was developed, CRNA education was provided, and the protocol was implemented. Pre- and postimplementation, CRNA knowledge, and confidence were assessed. Ventilation data were collected at 1-minute intervals intraoperatively and oxygen requirements were recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU).

FINDINGS

Use of intraoperative LPV strategies increased 2.4%. Overall CRNA knowledge (P = .588), confidence (P = .031), and practice (P < .001) improved from pre- to postimplementation. Driving pressures decreased from pre- to postimplementation (P < .001). Supplemental oxygen use on admission to the PACU decreased from 93.3% to 70.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions and implementation of a standardized protocol can improve the use of intraoperative LPV strategies and patient outcomes.

Intra-operative open-lung ventilatory strategy reduces postoperative complications after laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The role of the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and lung recruitment manoeuvre (LRM) combination (termed open-lung strategy, OLS) during intra-operative mechanical ventilation is not clear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an open-lung strategy constituting medium PEEP (6-8 cmH2O) and repeated LRMs protects against postoperative complications in at-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection under low-tidal-volume ventilation.

DESIGN

A prospective, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Single university-affiliated hospital, conducted from January 2017 to October 2018.

PATIENTS

A total of 280 patients at risk of pulmonary complications, scheduled for laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection under general anaesthesia and low-tidal-volume (6-8 ml kg-1 predicted body weight) ventilation.

INTERVENTION

The patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to a PEEP of 6-8 cmH2O with LRMs repeated every 30 min (OLS group) or a zero PEEP without LRMs (non-OLS group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was a composite of major pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications occurring within 7 days after surgery. The secondary outcomes included intra-operative potentially harmful hypotension and the need for vasopressors.

RESULTS

A total of 130 patients from each group were included in the primary outcome analysis. Primary outcome events occurred in 24 patients (18.5%) in the OLS group and 43 patients (33.1%) in the non-OLS group [relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.26 to 0.82; P = 0.009). More patients in the OLS group developed potentially harmful hypotension (OLS vs. non-OLS, 15% vs. 4.3%; P = 0.004) and needed vasopressors (25% vs. 8.6%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among at-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection under low-tidal-volume ventilation, an open-lung strategy with a PEEP of 6-8 cmH2O and repeated LRMs reduced postoperative complications compared with a strategy using zero PEEP without LRMs. Of note, LRMs should be used with caution in patients with haemodynamic instability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03160144.

Intraoperative management of brain-dead organ donors by anesthesiologists during an organ procurement procedure: results from a French survey

BACKGROUND

This study aimed at describing usual anesthetic practices for brain-dead donors (BDD) during an organ procurement (OP) procedure and to assess the knowledge and self-confidence of French anesthesiologists with this practice.

METHODS

An electronic and anonymous survey with closed-questions about anesthetic management of BDD was distributed to French anesthesiologists via the mailing list of the French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-eight responses were analyzed. Respondents were mainly attending physicians with more than 10 years of clinical experience. 78% of them declared being cognizant of guidelines regarding management of BDD. Advanced hemodynamic monitoring and endocrine substitution were rarely considered by respondents (31 and 35% of respondents, respectively). 98% of the respondents used crystalloids for fluid resuscitation. During the procedure, use of neuromuscular blockers, opioids and sedative agents were considered by respectively 84, 61 and 27% of the respondents. A very high level of agreement (10 [8-10], on a ten-points Likert-style scale) was reported concerning the expected impact of intraoperative anesthetic management on the primary function of grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Declared anesthetic practice appeared in accordance with guidelines concerning organ donor management in the ICU. Further studies are needed to evaluate the specific impact of intraoperative management during this procedure and thus the need for specific anesthetic guidelines.

Changes in ventilator settings and ventilation-induced lung injury in burn patients-A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Ventilation strategies aiming at prevention of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), including low tidal volumes (V_T) and use of positive end-expiratory pressures (PEEP) are increasingly used in critically ill patients. It is uncertain whether ventilation practices changed in a similar way in burn patients. Our objective was to describe applied ventilator settings and their relation to development of VILI in burn patients.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic search of the literature in PubMed and EMBASE using MeSH, EMTREE terms and keywords referring to burn or inhalation injury and mechanical ventilation.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting ventilator settings in adult or pediatric burn or inhalation injury patients receiving mechanical ventilation during the ICU stay.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently screened abstracts of identified studies for eligibility and performed data extraction.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The search identified 35 eligible studies. V_T declined from 14 ml/kg in studies performed before to around 8 ml/kg predicted body weight in studies performed after 2006. Low-PEEP levels (<10 cmH₂O) were reported in 70% of studies, with no changes over time. Peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) values above 35 cmH₂O were frequently reported. Nevertheless, 75% of the studies conducted in the last decade used limited maximum airway pressures (≤35 cmH₂O) compared to 45% of studies conducted prior to 2006. Occurrence of barotrauma, reported in 45% of the studies, ranged from 0 to 29%, and was more frequent in patients ventilated with higher compared to lower airway pressures.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows noticeable trends of ventilatory management in burn patients that mirrors those in critically ill non-burn patients. Variability in available ventilator data precluded us from drawing firm conclusions on the association between ventilator settings and the occurrence of VILI in burn patients.

Routine practice in mechanical ventilation in cardiac surgery in Italy

BACKGROUND

Management of mechanical ventilation is a key issue in the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and the improvement of surgical outcome. This is especially true in cardiac surgery where the use of the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) increases the risk of lung injury. In the last years a growing number of studies have shown that protective ventilation has led to excellent results. However, the literature in this regard is lacking in cardiac surgery and there are no univocal guidelines in this sense. The aim of this survey was to investigate the actual clinical practice about ventilation techniques used in the Italian cardiac surgery centers.

METHODS

A questionnaire of 32-item was sent to 69 Italian cardiac surgery centers, 56 of which return a completed form (81.2%). The questionnaire was assembled by three independent researchers and the final version was e-mailed to all members of the SIAARTI (Italian society of anesthesia resuscitation and intensive care medicine) Study Group on Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The answers were collected using a Google Forms sheet. In case of multiple questionnaires returned from the same center (i.e., different physicians from the same center responded) the head of department was asked to give a definite answer. Furthermore, for the 17 centers who reported multiple questionnaires, no large differences were found between the responses of different doctors belonging to the same center (12.3%±4.2% of discordant answers).

RESULTS

Intraoperatively, patients were ventilated with a tidal volume (TV) of 6-8 mL/kg (91.1% of centers), a positive end-expiration pressure of 3-5 cmH2O (76.8% of centers) and a fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) of 50-80% (60.7% of centers). During the CPB, the "stop ventilation" technique was frequently adopted (73.2%). Before the discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was never applied in 32.1% of the centers, but it was used in 46.4% of patients with postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a significant heterogeneity in ventilatory techniques among the Italian centers during CPB, whereas in the other surgical time the majority of the responding centers adopted a protective mechanical ventilation strategy.

Evaluation of Perioperative Ventilation Strategies: National Survey Study

OBJECTIVE

Lung injury can develop in the perioperative period due to ventilation management techniques. Thus, the attitude of anaesthetists on protective ventilation (PV) practice comes into question. In our study, we aimed to evaluate the perioperative ventilation practice of anaesthetists and trainees on anaesthesiology by a survey study.

METHODS

Survey form was sent to all doctors registered to TARD via electronic mail. The participants were asked questions involving PV parameters such as low tidal volume (TV) according to ideal body weight (BW), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), FiO2 use and recruitment manoeuvre (RM) application. In total, 411 doctors who answered the survey were included to the study. Application rates of PV parameters and causes were compared within the answers obtained. P<0.05 was accepted statistically significant.

RESULTS

PV was practised by 19.4% of the participants. Those who preferred low TV used ideal BW more frequently (p<0.001). PEEP of 4-6 cm H2O was commonly used (p<0.001). The participants mostly preferred FiO2 of 1.0 (60.4%), and application rate of RM was found to be 17.2%. The use of all PV parameters was detected to be higher among instructors than among other groups.

CONCLUSION

In our study, application ratio of PV with all its parameters was found to be lower. Among the parameters, while low TV according to ideal BW and PEEP were applied at higher ratios, the use of RM and low oxygen percentage were applied less frequently. While PV was found to be useful in terms of perioperative ventilation strategies, low practice rates may result from habits besides lack of knowledge and experience; comprehensive and quality education studies are needed to overcome this.