Body Position Alters Mechanical Power and Respiratory Mechanics During Thoracic Surgery

Effects of Positive End-expiratory Pressure on Pulmonary Perfusion Distribution and Intrapulmonary Shunt during One-lung Ventilation in Pigs: A Randomized Crossover Study

BACKGROUND

During one-lung ventilation (OLV), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) can improve lung aeration but might overdistend lung units and increase intrapulmonary shunt. The authors hypothesized that higher PEEP shifts pulmonary perfusion from the ventilated to the nonventilated lung, resulting in a U-shaped relationship with intrapulmonary shunt during OLV.

METHODS

In nine anesthetized female pigs, a thoracotomy was performed and intravenous lipopolysaccharide infused to mimic the inflammatory response of thoracic surgery. Animals underwent OLV in supine position with PEEP of 0 cm H2O, 5 cm H2O, titrated to best respiratory system compliance, and 15 cm H2O (PEEP0, PEEP5, PEEPtitr, and PEEP15, respectively, 45 min each, Latin square sequence). Respiratory, hemodynamic, and gas exchange variables were measured. The distributions of perfusion and ventilation were determined by IV fluorescent microspheres and computed tomography, respectively.

RESULTS

Compared to two-lung ventilation, the driving pressure increased with OLV, irrespective of the PEEP level. During OLV, cardiac output was lower at PEEP15 (5.5 ± 1.5 l/min) than PEEP0 (7.6 ± 3 l/min) and PEEP5 (7.4 ± 2.9 l/min; P = 0.004), while the intrapulmonary shunt was highest at PEEP0 (PEEP0: 48.1% ± 14.4%; PEEP5: 42.4% ± 14.8%; PEEPtitr: 37.8% ± 11.0%; PEEP15: 39.0% ± 10.7%; P = 0.027). The relative perfusion of the ventilated lung did not differ among PEEP levels (PEEP0: 65.0% ± 10.6%; PEEP5: 68.7% ± 8.7%; PEEPtitr: 68.2% ± 10.5%; PEEP15: 58.4% ± 12.8%; P = 0.096), but the centers of relative perfusion and ventilation in the ventilated lung shifted from ventral to dorsal and from cranial to caudal zones with increasing PEEP.

CONCLUSIONS

In this experimental model of thoracic surgery, higher PEEP during OLV did not shift the perfusion from the ventilated to the nonventilated lung, thus not increasing intrapulmonary shunt.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Association between mechanical power during one-lung ventilation and pulmonary complications after thoracoscopic lung resection surgery: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The role of mechanical power on pulmonary outcomes after thoracic surgery with one-lung ventilation was unclear. We investigated the association between mechanical power and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung resection surgery.

METHODS

In this single-center, prospective observational study, 622 patients scheduled for thoracoscopic lung resection surgery were included. Volume control mode with lung protective ventilation strategies were implemented in all participants. The primary endpoint was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications during hospital stay. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between mechanical power and outcomes.

RESULTS

The incidence of pulmonary complications after surgery during hospital stay was 24.6% (150 of 609 patients). The multivariable analysis showed that there was no link between mechanical power and postoperative pulmonary complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung resection with standardized lung-protective ventilation, no association was found between mechanical power and postoperative pulmonary complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number: ChiCTR2200058528, date of registration: April 10, 2022.

Association of Mechanical Energy and Power with Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Lung Resection Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trial Data

BACKGROUND

Mechanical power (MP), the rate of mechanical energy (ME) delivery, is a recently introduced unifying ventilator parameter consisting of tidal volume, airway pressures, and respiratory rates, which predicts pulmonary complications in several clinical contexts. However, ME has not been previously studied in the perioperative context, and neither parameter has been studied in the context of thoracic surgery utilizing one-lung ventilation.

METHODS

The relationships between ME variables and postoperative pulmonary complications were evaluated in this post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter randomized clinical trial of lung resection surgery conducted between 2020 and 2021 (n = 1,170). Time-weighted average MP and ME (the area under the MP time curve) were obtained for individual patients. The primary analysis was the association of time-weighted average MP and ME with pulmonary complications within 7 postoperative days. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the relationships between energy variables and the primary outcome.

RESULTS

In 1,055 patients analyzed, pulmonary complications occurred in 41% (431 of 1,055). The median (interquartile ranges) ME and time-weighted average MP in patients who developed postoperative pulmonary complications versus those who did not were 1,146 (811 to 1,530) J versus 924 (730 to 1,240) J (P < 0.001), and 6.9 (5.5 to 8.7) J/min versus 6.7 (5.2 to 8.5) J/min (P = 0.091), respectively. ME was independently associated with postoperative pulmonary complications (ORadjusted, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.80]; P = 0.001). However, the association between time-weighted average MP and postoperative pulmonary complications was time-dependent, and time-weighted average MP was significantly associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in cases utilizing longer periods of mechanical ventilation (210 min or greater; ORadjusted, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.93]; P = 0.007). Normalization of ME and time-weighted average MP either to predicted body weight or to respiratory system compliance did not alter these associations.

CONCLUSIONS

ME and, in cases requiring longer periods of mechanical ventilation, MP were independently associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in thoracic surgery.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Bilateral Simultaneous Lumbar Artery Perforator Flaps in Breast Reconstruction: Perioperative Outcomes Addressing Safety and Feasibility

BACKGROUND

The lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flap has emerged as an excellent option for breast reconstruction, but its steep learning curve makes it less approachable. Furthermore, length of the operation, flap ischemia time, need for composite vascular grafts, complex microsurgery, multiple position changes, and general concern for safety has led experienced surgeons to stage bilateral reconstructions. In the authors' experience, simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps are feasible, but overall perioperative safety has not been fully explored.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients (62 flaps) underwent simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps and were included in the study (excluding stacked four-flaps and unilateral flaps). Patients underwent two position changes in the operating room: supine to prone and then supine again. A retrospective review of patient demographics, intraoperative details, and complications was performed.

RESULTS

The overall flap success rate was 96.8%. Five flaps were compromised postoperatively. The intraoperative anastomotic revision rate was 24.1% per flap (4.3% per anastomosis). The significant complication rate was 22.6%. The number of sustained hypothermic episodes and hypotensive episodes correlated with intraoperative arterial thrombosis ( P < 0.05). The number of hypotensive episodes and increased intraoperative fluid correlated with flap compromise ( P < 0.05). High body mass index correlated with overall complications ( P < 0.05). The presence of diabetes correlated with intraoperative arterial thrombosis ( P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous bilateral LAP flaps can be performed safely with an experienced and trained microsurgical team. Hypothermia and hypotension negatively affect the initial anastomotic success. In this complex operation, a coordinated approach between the anesthesia and nursing team is paramount for patient safety.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Distribution of transpulmonary pressure during one-lung ventilation in pigs at different body positions

Background. Global and regional transpulmonary pressure (PL) during one-lung ventilation (OLV) is poorly characterized. We hypothesized that global and regional PL and driving PL (ΔPL) increase during protective low tidal volume OLV compared to two-lung ventilation (TLV), and vary with body position. Methods. In sixteen anesthetized juvenile pigs, intra-pleural pressure sensors were placed in ventral, dorsal, and caudal zones of the left hemithorax by video-assisted thoracoscopy. A right thoracotomy was performed and lipopolysaccharide administered intravenously to mimic the inflammatory response due to thoracic surgery. Animals were ventilated in a volume-controlled mode with a tidal volume (VT) of 6 mL kg-1 during TLV and of 5 mL kg-1 during OLV and a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 cmH2O. Global and local transpulmonary pressures were calculated. Lung instability was defined as end-expiratory PL<2.9 cmH2O according to previous investigations. Variables were acquired during TLV (TLVsupine), left lung ventilation in supine (OLVsupine), semilateral (OLVsemilateral), lateral (OLVlateral) and prone (OLVprone) positions randomized according to Latin-square sequence. Effects of position were tested using repeated measures ANOVA. Results. End-expiratory PL and ΔPL were higher during OLVsupine than TLVsupine. During OLV, regional end-inspiratory PL and ΔPL did not differ significantly among body positions. Yet, end-expiratory PL was lower in semilateral (ventral: 4.8 ± 2.9 cmH2O; caudal: 3.1 ± 2.6 cmH2O) and lateral (ventral: 1.9 ± 3.3 cmH2O; caudal: 2.7 ± 1.7 cmH2O) compared to supine (ventral: 4.8 ± 2.9 cmH2O; caudal: 3.1 ± 2.6 cmH2O) and prone position (ventral: 1.7 ± 2.5 cmH2O; caudal: 3.3 ± 1.6 cmH2O), mainly in ventral (p ≤ 0.001) and caudal (p = 0.007) regions. Lung instability was detected more often in semilateral (26 out of 48 measurements; p = 0.012) and lateral (29 out of 48 measurements, p < 0.001) as compared to supine position (15 out of 48 measurements), and more often in lateral as compared to prone position (19 out of 48 measurements, p = 0.027). Conclusion. Compared to TLV, OLV increased lung stress. Body position did not affect stress of the ventilated lung during OLV, but lung stability was lowest in semilateral and lateral decubitus position.

Airway driving pressure is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery: a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study

Background

High airway driving pressure is associated with adverse outcomes in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, but large multicentre studies investigating airway driving pressure during major surgery are lacking. We hypothesised that increased driving pressure is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Methods

In this preregistered multicentre retrospective observational cohort study, the authors reviewed major abdominal surgical procedures in 11 hospitals from 2004 to 2018. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications, defined as postoperative pneumonia, unplanned tracheal intubation, or prolonged mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h. Associations between intraoperative dynamic driving pressure and outcomes, adjusted for patient and procedural factors, were evaluated.

Results

Among 14 218 qualifying cases, 389 (2.7%) experienced postoperative pulmonary complications. After adjustment, the mean dynamic driving pressure was associated with postoperative pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio for every 1 cm H₂O increase: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.06; P<0.001). Neither tidal volume nor PEEP was associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Increased BMI, shorter height, and female sex were predictors for higher dynamic driving pressure (β=0.35, 95% CI 0.32-0.39, P<0.001; β=-0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.00, P=0.005; and β=0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.86, P<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

Dynamic airway driving pressure, but not tidal volume or PEEP, is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in models controlling for a large number of risk predictors and covariates. Such models are capable of risk prediction applicable to individual patients.

Safely Modified Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Segment VI and/or VII Hepatic Lesions Using the Left Lateral Decubitus Position

Purpose

To explore the feasibility and safety of using the left lateral decubitus position (LLDP) to perform laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for the treatment of hepatic lesions in segment VI and/or VII.

Patients and Methods

Clinical data concerning 50 patients underwent LLR including 25 patients in the LLDP and the other 25 patients in the routine operative position (ROP) at Shulan (Hangzhou) Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang Shuren University Shulan International Medical College (Hangzhou, China) and Shulan (Quzhou) Hospital between March 2019 and May 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. All of the patients underwent LLR while in the LLDP or the ROP for the treatment of hepatic lesions located in segment VI and/or VII.

Results

The preoperative clinical and laboratory parameters were comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). All patients completed the surgery successfully. There were two patients required conversion to open resection in the ROP comparing with zero in the LLDP. The mean operative time was 256.9 ± 132.7 minutes in LLDP and 255.7 ± 92.1 minutes in ROP, while the median perioperative blood loss was 100 mL (range: 50–300 mL) in LLDP and 200 mL (range: 50–425 mL), respectively. The postoperative pathological examination showed that margin-negative resection was achieved all of the cases. The important postoperative parameters all returned to normal within five days after the LLR. The mean postoperative hospital stay (15.6 vs 19.3 days; p < 0.05) and the extraction of the drainage tube time (7.8 vs 10.4 days; p < 0.05) were shorter for patients in LLDP.

Conclusion

The LLDP represents a safe and feasible position for performing LLR in selected patients with lesions in segment VI and/or VII. LLR in the LLDP is helpful in terms of the exposure of the surgical field and the recovery of the patient.

A case requiring re-thoracotomy due to a significant reduction of tidal volume after commencement of chest tube drainage under pressure control ventilation following lower lobectomy

Background

The use of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) during one lung ventilation (OLV) has been popular to avoid high airway pressure. We experienced a case of a significant reduction of tidal volume (TV) after commencement of chest tube drainage under PCV following lower lobectomy, which required re-thoracotomy to evaluate the degree of air leak.

Case presentation

A 70-year-old man was scheduled for a lower lobectomy. OLV was managed by PCV. The driving pressure was set at 15–20 cmH2O with 4 cmH2O of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). A chest drainage tube was placed after completion of lobectomy. To switch OLV to two lung ventilation (TLV), PCV settings were changed to the driving pressure at 10 cmH2O with 4 cmH2O of PEEP, which generated 450 ml of TV. Immediately after applying drainage (−10 cmH2O), TV decreased down to 250 ml. To maintain 450 ml of TV, PCV was switched to volume-controlled ventilation with 450 ml of TV, which raised the plateau pressure close to 24 cmH2O. Re-thoracotomy was done; however, significant findings were not detected.

Conclusions

We experienced a case of a significant reduction of TV immediately after chest tube drainage following lower lobectomy. Probably, negative intrapleural pressure increased the residual volume, which might have significantly affected the limited lung volume after lobectomy, resulting in decreasing TV during PCV.

Associations of dynamic driving pressure and mechanical power with postoperative pulmonary complications-posthoc analysis of two randomised clinical trials in open abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

While an association of the intraoperative driving pressure with postoperative pulmonary complications has been described before, it is uncertain whether the intraoperative mechanical power is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications.

METHODS

Posthoc analysis of two international, multicentre randomised clinical trials (ISRCTN70332574 and NCT02148692) conducted between 2011-2013 and 2014-2018, in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery comparing the effect of two different positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels on postoperative pulmonary complications. Time-weighted average dynamic driving pressure and mechanical power were calculated for individual patients. A multivariable logistic regression model adjusted for confounders was used to assess the independent associations of driving pressure and mechanical power with the occurrence of a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications, the primary endpoint of this posthoc analysis.

FINDINGS

In 1191 patients included, postoperative pulmonary complications occurrence was 35.9%. Median time-weighted average driving pressure and mechanical power were 14·0 [11·0-17·0] cmH₂O, and 7·6 [5·1-10·0] J/min, respectively. While driving pressure was not independently associated with postoperative pulmonary complications (odds ratio, 1·06 [95% CI 0·88-1·28]; p=0.534), the mechanical power had an independent association with the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications (odds ratio, 1·28 [95% CI 1·05-1·57]; p=0.016). These findings were independent of body mass index or the level of PEEP used, i.e., independent of the randomisation arm.

INTERPRETATION

In this merged cohort of surgery patients, higher intraoperative mechanical power was independently associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Mechanical power could serve as a summary ventilatory biomarker for the risk for postoperative pulmonary complications in these patients, but our findings need confirmation in other, preferably prospective studies.

FUNDING

The two original studies were supported by unrestricted grants from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location AMC. For this current analysis, no additional funding was requested. The funding sources had neither a role in the design, collection of data, statistical analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, nor in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Novel method of transpulmonary pressure measurement with an air-filled esophageal catheter

Background

There is a strong rationale for proposing transpulmonary pressure-guided protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. The reference esophageal balloon catheter method requires complex in vivo calibration, expertise and specific material order. A simple, inexpensive, accurate and reproducible method of measuring esophageal pressure would greatly facilitate the measure of transpulmonary pressure to individualize protective ventilation in the intensive care unit.

Results

We propose an air-filled esophageal catheter method without balloon, using a disposable catheter that allows reproducible esophageal pressure measurements. We use a 49-cm-long 10 Fr thin suction catheter, positioned in the lower-third of the esophagus and connected to an air-filled disposable blood pressure transducer bound to the monitor and pressurized by an air-filled infusion bag. Only simple calibration by zeroing the transducer to atmospheric pressure and unit conversion from mmHg to cmH₂O are required. We compared our method with the reference balloon catheter both ex vivo, using pressure chambers, and in vivo, in 15 consecutive mechanically ventilated patients. Esophageal-to-airway pressure change ratios during the dynamic occlusion test were close to one (1.03 ± 0.19 and 1.00 ± 0.16 in the controlled and assisted modes, respectively), validating the proper esophageal positioning. The Bland–Altman analysis revealed no bias of our method compared with the reference and good precision for inspiratory, expiratory and delta esophageal pressure measurements in both the controlled (largest bias −0.5 cmH₂O [95% confidence interval: −0.9; −0.1] cmH₂O; largest limits of agreement −3.5 to 2.5 cmH₂O) and assisted modes (largest bias −0.3 [−2.6; 2.0] cmH₂O). We observed a good repeatability (intra-observer, intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC: 0.89 [0.79; 0.96]) and reproducibility (inter-observer ICC: 0.89 [0.76; 0.96]) of esophageal measurements. The direct comparison with pleural pressure in two patients and spectral analysis by Fourier transform confirmed the reliability of the air-filled catheter-derived esophageal pressure as an accurate surrogate of pleural pressure. A calculator for transpulmonary pressures is available online.

Conclusions

We propose a simple, minimally invasive, inexpensive and reproducible method for esophageal pressure monitoring with an air-filled esophageal catheter without balloon. It holds the promise of widespread bedside use of transpulmonary pressure-guided protective ventilation in ICU patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40635-021-00411-w.

Management of Intraoperative Mechanical Ventilation to Prevent Postoperative Complications after General Anesthesia: A Narrative Review

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is still necessary in many surgical procedures; nonetheless, intraoperative MV is not free from harmful effects. Protective ventilation strategies, which include the combination of low tidal volume and adequate positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels, are usually adopted to minimize the ventilation-induced lung injury and to avoid post-operative pulmonary complications (PPCs). Even so, volutrauma and atelectrauma may co-exist at different levels of tidal volume and PEEP, and therefore, the physiological response to the MV settings should be monitored in each patient. A personalized perioperative approach is gaining relevance in the field of intraoperative MV; in particular, many efforts have been made to individualize PEEP, giving more emphasis on physiological and functional status to the whole body. In this review, we summarized the latest findings about the optimization of PEEP and intraoperative MV in different surgical settings. Starting from a physiological point of view, we described how to approach the individualized MV and monitor the effects of MV on lung function.

A Lower Tidal Volume Regimen during One-lung Ventilation for Lung Resection Surgery Is Not Associated with Reduced Postoperative Pulmonary Complications

BACKGROUND

Protective ventilation may improve outcomes after major surgery. However, in the context of one-lung ventilation, such a strategy is incompletely defined. The authors hypothesized that a putative one-lung protective ventilation regimen would be independently associated with decreased odds of pulmonary complications after thoracic surgery.

METHODS

The authors merged Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database and Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group intraoperative data for lung resection procedures using one-lung ventilation across five institutions from 2012 to 2016. They defined one-lung protective ventilation as the combination of both median tidal volume 5 ml/kg or lower predicted body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure 5 cm H2O or greater. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day major postoperative pulmonary complications.

RESULTS

A total of 3,232 cases were available for analysis. Tidal volumes decreased modestly during the study period (6.7 to 6.0 ml/kg; P < 0.001), and positive end-expiratory pressure increased from 4 to 5 cm H2O (P < 0.001). Despite increasing adoption of a "protective ventilation" strategy (5.7% in 2012 vs. 17.9% in 2016), the prevalence of pulmonary complications did not change significantly (11.4 to 15.7%; P = 0.147). In a propensity score matched cohort (381 matched pairs), protective ventilation (mean tidal volume 6.4 vs. 4.4 ml/kg) was not associated with a reduction in pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.32). In an unmatched cohort, the authors were unable to define a specific alternative combination of positive end-expiratory pressure and tidal volume that was associated with decreased risk of pulmonary complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter retrospective observational analysis of patients undergoing one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery, the authors did not detect an independent association between a low tidal volume lung-protective ventilation regimen and a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

PEEP in thoracic anesthesia: pros and cons

Protective ventilation includes a strategy with low tidal volume, Plateau pressure, driving pressure, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and recruitment maneuvers on the ventilated lung. The rationale for the application of PEEP during one-lung ventilation (OLV) is that PEEP may contribute to minimize atelectrauma, preventing airway closure and alveolar collapse and improving the ventilation/perfusion to the ventilated lung. However, in case of high partial pressure of oxygen the application of PEEP may cause increased pulmonary vascular resistance, thus diverting blood flow to the non-ventilated lung, and worsening ventilation/perfusion. Further, PEEP may be associated with higher risk of hemodynamic impairment, increased need for fluids and vasoactive drugs. Positive effects on outcome have been reported by titrating PEEP according to driving pressure, targeted to obtain the optimum respiratory as well as pulmonary system compliance. This may vary according to the method employed for titration and should be performed individually for each patient. In summary, the potential for harm combined with the lack of evidence for improved outcome suggest that PEEP must be judiciously used during OLV even when titrated to a safe target, and only as much as necessary to maintain an appropriate gas exchange under low protective tidal volumes and driving pressures.