Evidence Hub

Low-tidal volume mechanical ventilation against no ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass in heart surgery (MECANO): a randomized controlled trial

L. Nguyen, P. Estagnasié, M. Merzoug, A. Brusset, Jean-Dominique Law Koune, S. Aubert, T. Waldmann, C. Naudin et al.

Chest, 2020

1,501 participants · 44 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pulmonary complications are common after cardiac surgery and have been related to lung collapsus during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). There is no consensus on the effects of maintaining mechanical ventilation during CPB to decrease these complications.

RESEARCH QUESTION

To determine whether maintaining low-tidal ventilation (3 mL/kg 5 times per minute, with positive end expiratory pressure 5 cmH2O) during CPB (VENT strategy) was superior to a resting-lung strategy, with no ventilation (noV strategy), regarding postoperative pulmonary complications, including mortality.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing cardiac surgery at a single center from May 2017 to August 2019 were randomized between VENT and noV strategy during CPB (1:1 ratio). Apart from CPB phase, perioperative ventilation procedures were standardized.

RESULTS

The study included 1501 patients (68.8 ±10.3 years, 1152 (76.7%) men, EuroSCORE II 2.3 ±2.7). There were 756 patients in the VENT strategy group and there were no differences in baseline characteristics and types of procedures between the two groups. Intention-to-treat analysis yielded no significant difference between VENT and noV groups regarding incidence of the primary composite outcome combining death, early respiratory failure, ventilation support beyond day 2 and reintubation with 112/756, 14.8% in the VENT group versus 133/745, 17.9% in the noV group, odds-ratio(OR)=0.80 (95%…

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: 1,501 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