Identificador persistente para citar o vincular este elemento: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/123909
Campo DC Valoridioma
dc.contributor.authorCampos, Niklas S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBluth, Thomasen_US
dc.contributor.authorHemmes, Sabrine NTen_US
dc.contributor.authorLibrero, Julianen_US
dc.contributor.authorPozo, Natividaden_US
dc.contributor.authorFerrando, Carlosen_US
dc.contributor.authorBall, Lorenzoen_US
dc.contributor.authorMazzinari, Guidoen_US
dc.contributor.authorPelosi, Paoloen_US
dc.contributor.authorGamade de Abreu, Marceloen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchultz, Marcus J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSerpa Neto, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Pérez, Aurelio Eduardoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-11T11:26:04Z-
dc.date.available2023-07-11T11:26:04Z-
dc.date.issued2022en_US
dc.identifier.issn0007-0912en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/123909-
dc.description.abstractBackground: High intraoperative PEEP with recruitment manoeuvres may improve perioperative outcomes. We re-examined this question by conducting a patient-level meta-analysis of three clinical trials in adult patients at increased risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who underwent non-cardiothoracic and non-neurological surgery. Methods: The three trials enrolled patients at 128 hospitals in 24 countries from February 2011 to February 2018. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with low tidal volume. Analyses were performed using one-stage, two-level, mixed modelling (site as a random effect; trial as a fixed effect). The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications within the first week, analysed using mixed-effect logistic regression. Pre-specified subgroup analyses of nine patient characteristics and seven procedure and care-delivery characteristics were also performed. Results: Complete datasets were available for 1913 participants ventilated with high PEEP and recruitment manoeuvres, compared with 1924 participants who received low PEEP. The primary outcome occurred in 562/1913 (29.4%) participants randomised to high PEEP, compared with 620/1924 (32.2%) participants randomised to low PEEP (unadjusted odds ratio [OR]=0.87; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.75–1.01; P=0.06). Higher PEEP resulted in 87/1913 (4.5%) participants requiring interventions for desaturation, compared with 216/1924 (11.2%) participants randomised to low PEEP (OR=0.34; 95% CI, 0.26–0.45). Intraoperative hypotension was associated more frequently (784/1913 [41.0%]) with high PEEP, compared with low PEEP (579/1924 [30.1%]; OR=1.87; 95% CI, 1.60–2.17). Conclusions: High PEEP combined with recruitment manoeuvres during low tidal volume ventilation in patients undergoing major surgery did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications.en_US
dc.languagespaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBritish journal of anaesthesiaen_US
dc.sourceBritish Journal of Anaesthesia, [ISSN 0007-0912], v. 128, (6), p. 1040-1051, (2022).en_US
dc.subject32 Ciencias médicasen_US
dc.subject3213 Cirugíaen_US
dc.subject.otherMechanical ventilationen_US
dc.subject.otherPEEPen_US
dc.subject.otherPostoperative pulmonary complicationsen_US
dc.subject.otherSurgeryen_US
dc.titleIntraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure and postoperative pulmonary complications: a patient-level meta-analysis of three randomised clinical trialsen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.bja.2022.02.039en_US
dc.identifier.pmid35431038-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85128227457-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000846888200026-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.description.lastpage1051en_US
dc.identifier.issue6-
dc.description.firstpage1040en_US
dc.relation.volume128en_US
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.description.numberofpages12en_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.date.coverdateAbril 2022en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-MEDen_US
dc.description.sjr2,487-
dc.description.jcr9,8-
dc.description.sjrqQ1-
dc.description.jcrqQ1-
dc.description.scieSCIE-
dc.description.miaricds11,0-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptGIR IUSA-ONEHEALTH 5: Reproducción Animal, Oncología y Anestesiología Comparadas-
crisitem.author.deptIU de Sanidad Animal y Seguridad Alimentaria-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Ciencias Médicas y Quirúrgicas-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-0947-263X-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU de Sanidad Animal y Seguridad Alimentaria-
crisitem.author.fullNameRodríguez Pérez, Aurelio Eduardo-
Colección:Artículos
Vista resumida

Google ScholarTM

Verifica

Altmetric


Comparte



Exporta metadatos



Los elementos en ULPGC accedaCRIS están protegidos por derechos de autor con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.