Carlos Ferrando , Jordi Vallverdú , Luigi Zattera , Gerardo Tusman , Fernando Suárez-Sipmann
{"title":"Improving lung protective mechanical ventilation: the individualised intraoperative open-lung approach","authors":"Carlos Ferrando , Jordi Vallverdú , Luigi Zattera , Gerardo Tusman , Fernando Suárez-Sipmann","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.10.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite the maturity and sophistication of anaesthesia workstations, improvements in our understanding of intraoperative mechanical ventilation, and use of less invasive surgical techniques, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are still a common problem in surgical patients of all ages. PPCs are associated with a higher incidence of perioperative morbidity and mortality, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. PPCs are strongly associated with anaesthesia-induced atelectasis, which predisposes to lung damage when partially collapsed lungs are subjected to mechanical ventilation. Lung protective ventilation is thus a modifiable factor that can positively impact the incidence of PPCs after surgery. Intraoperative protective ventilation strategies have been based on two main but intrinsically different hypotheses: one based on sole reduction of tidal volume and pressures, using minimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), tolerating the presence of lung collapse, and the other also limiting tidal volume and pressures after actively resolving atelectasis by lung recruitment and PEEP individualisation, the individualised open-lung approach. We review the concepts of the individualised open-lung approach, its potential benefits, and outstanding questions. We conclude with a proposal for personalised lung protective ventilation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":"134 2","pages":"Pages 281-287"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007091224006093","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Despite the maturity and sophistication of anaesthesia workstations, improvements in our understanding of intraoperative mechanical ventilation, and use of less invasive surgical techniques, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are still a common problem in surgical patients of all ages. PPCs are associated with a higher incidence of perioperative morbidity and mortality, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. PPCs are strongly associated with anaesthesia-induced atelectasis, which predisposes to lung damage when partially collapsed lungs are subjected to mechanical ventilation. Lung protective ventilation is thus a modifiable factor that can positively impact the incidence of PPCs after surgery. Intraoperative protective ventilation strategies have been based on two main but intrinsically different hypotheses: one based on sole reduction of tidal volume and pressures, using minimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), tolerating the presence of lung collapse, and the other also limiting tidal volume and pressures after actively resolving atelectasis by lung recruitment and PEEP individualisation, the individualised open-lung approach. We review the concepts of the individualised open-lung approach, its potential benefits, and outstanding questions. We conclude with a proposal for personalised lung protective ventilation.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience.
The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence.
Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.