Temporal trends and current practice patterns for intraoperative ventilation at U.S. academic medical centers: a retrospective study

BMC Anesthesiology

Research Article

Marcos F Vidal Melo¹  Raquel R Bartz²  James M Blum³  Daryl J Kor⁴  Richard H Epstein⁵  Ana Fernandez-Bustamante⁶  Jonathan P Wanderer⁷  Jesse M Ehrenfeld⁸ 

[1] Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA;Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA;Department of Anesthesiology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, GA, USA;Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA;Department of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel College of Medicine at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA;Department of Anesthesiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Colorado, CO, USA;Departments of Anesthesiology and Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University, The Vanderbilt Clinic, 1301 Medical Center Drive, Suite 4648, Nashville, TN, USA;Departments of Anesthesiology, Biomedical Informatics, Health Policy and Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA;

关键词: Intraoperative ventilation;    Lung protective ventilation;    Practice patterns;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12871-015-0010-3

 received in 2014-11-16, accepted in 2015-02-21,  发布年份 2015

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundLung protective ventilation strategies utilizing lower tidal volumes per predicted body weight (PBW) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) have been suggested to be beneficial in a variety of surgical populations. Recent clinical studies have used control groups ventilated with high tidal volumes without PEEP based on the assumption that this reflects current clinical practice. We hypothesized that ventilation strategies have changed over time, that most anesthetics in U.S. academic medical centers are currently performed with lower tidal volumes, and that most receive PEEP.MethodsIntraoperative data were pooled for adults undergoing general anesthesia with tracheal intubation. Median tidal volumes per kilogram of PBW were categorized as > 10, 8–10 and < 8 mL per kg of PBW. The percentages of cases in 2013 that were performed with median tidal volumes < 8 mL per kg of PBW and PEEP were determined. As a secondary analysis, a proportional odds model using institution, year, height, weight and gender determined the relative associations of these factors using categorical and interquartile odds ratios.Results295,540 cases were analyzed from 5 institutions over a period of 10 years. In 2013, 59.3% of cases used median tidal volumes < 8 mL per kg of PBW, 83.3% used PEEP, and 51.0% used both. Of those cases with PEEP, 60.9% used a median pressure of ≥ 5 cmH2O. Predictors of lower categories of tidal volumes included height (odds ratio (OR) 10.83, 95% confidence interval [10.50, 11.16]), institution (lowest OR 0.98 [0.96, 1.00], highest OR 9.63 [9.41, 9.86]), year (lowest OR 1.32 [1.21, 1.44], highest OR 6.31 [5.84, 6.82]), male gender (OR 1.10 [1.07, 1.12]), and weight (OR 0.30 [0.29, 0.31]).ConclusionMost general anesthetics with tracheal intubation at the institutions surveyed are currently performed with a median tidal volume < 8 mL per kg of PBW, most are managed with PEEP of ≥ 5 cmH2O and approximately half utilize both. Given the diversity of the institutions included, this is likely reflective of practice in U.S. academic medical centers. The utilization of higher tidal volumes without PEEP in control groups for clinical research studies should be reconsidered.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Wanderer et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015