Evidence Hub

Driving Pressure–Guided Individualized Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Cheng-Mi Zhang, Feng-Ying Xu, Wei-Wei Li, Xingyu Tong, Ran Xia, Wei Wang, Jian-Er Du, Xue-Yin Shi

Anesthesia and Analgesia, 2021

148 participants · 68 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) remains unclear. Recent evidence showed that driving pressure was closely related to PPCs. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that an individualized PEEP guided by minimum driving pressure during abdominal surgery would reduce the incidence of PPCs. METHODS: This single-centered, randomized controlled trial included a total of 148 patients scheduled for open upper abdominal surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive an individualized PEEP guided by minimum driving pressure or an empiric fixed PEEP of 6 cm H2O. The primary outcome was the incidence of clinically significant PPCs within the first 7 days after surgery, using a χ2 test. Secondary outcomes were the severity of PPCs, the area of atelectasis, and pleural effusion. Other outcomes, such as the incidence of different types of PPCs (including hypoxemia, atelectasis, pleural effusion, dyspnea, pneumonia, pneumothorax, and acute respiratory distress syndrome), intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality were also explored. RESULTS: The median value of PEEP in the individualized group was 10 cm H2O. The incidence of clinically significant PPCs was significantly lower in the individualized PEEP group compared with that in the fixed PEEP group (26 of 67 [38.8%] vs 42 of 67 [62.7%], relative risk = 0.619, 95% confidence intervals, 0.435–0.881; P =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 148 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free