Status
Conditions
Treatments
Study type
Funder types
Identifiers
About
The aim of this study is to compare the effects of a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment (high PEEP levels adjusted according to driving pressure and recruitment maneuvers) with that of a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension (low PEEP level without recruitment maneuver) on postoperative respiratory failure and mortality in patients receiving low VT ventilation during emergency abdominal surgery.
Full description
Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are the second most common surgical complication and adversely influence surgical morbidity. Postoperative respiratory failure (PRF) is one of the most serious pulmonary complication.
Two hypotheses can be forward by the literature. First, a low VT lung protective ventilation in combination with a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension by using low PEEP level (and without recruitment maneuver) could improve postoperative outcome while reducing the risk of hemodynamic alterations or, second, could increase the risk of PRF compared with a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment using higher PEEP level adjusted according to driving pressure in combination with recruitment maneuvers in adult patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Given the uncertainties, and in order to determine the impact of lung protective ventilation strategies on clinical outcomes of high-risk surgical patients, a randomized trial is needed.
Our primary hypothesis is that, during low VT ventilation, a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment by using high PEEP levels adjusted according to driving pressure in combination with recruitment maneuvers could be more effective at reducing PRF and mortality after emergency abdominal surgery than a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension by using lower PEEP without recruitment maneuver.
Given the number of patients for whom the question applies, the prevalence and the burden of PPCs, the study can have significant clinical importance and public health implications.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
707 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal