Individual and combined effects of chemical and mechanical power on postoperative pulmonary complications: a secondary analysis of the REPEAT study

Introduction: Intra-operative supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation expose the lungs to potentially injurious energy. This can be quantified as 'chemical power' and 'mechanical power', respectively. In this study, we sought to determine if intra-operative chemical and mechanical power, individually and/or in combination, are associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods: Using an individual patient data analysis of three randomised clinical trials of intra-operative ventilation, we summarised intra-operative chemical and mechanical power using time-weighted averages. We evaluated the association between intra-operative chemical and mechanical power and a collapsed composite of postoperative pulmonary complications using multivariable logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios related to the effect of 1 J.min-1 increase in chemical or mechanical power with adjustment for demographic and intra-operative characteristics. We also included an interaction term to assess for potential synergistic effects of chemical and mechanical power on postoperative pulmonary complications. Results: Of 3837 patients recruited to three individual trials, 2492 with full datasets were included in the analysis. Intra-operative time-weighted average (SD) chemical power was 10.2 (3.9) J.min-1 and mechanical power was 10.5 (4.4) J.min-1. An increase of 1 J.min-1 in chemical power was associated with 8% higher odds of postoperative pulmonary complications (OR 1.08, 95%CI 1.05-1.10, p < 0.001), while the same increase in mechanical power raised odds by 5% (OR 1.05, 95%CI 1.02-1.08, p = 0.003). We did not find evidence of a significant interaction between chemical and mechanical power (p = 0.40), suggestive of an additive rather than synergistic effect on postoperative pulmonary complications. Discussion: Both chemical and mechanical power are independently associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Further work is required to determine causality

Clinical practice in the management of postoperative delirium by Chinese anesthesiologists: a cross-sectional survey designed by the European Society of Anaesthesiology

ObjectiveIn this survey, we assessed the current clinical management of postoperative delirium (POD) among Chinese anesthesiologists, after publishing the European POD guideline.MethodsWe administered an electronic survey, designed according to the European POD guideline. The survey was completed using mobile devices.ResultsIn total, 1,514 respondents from China participated in the survey. Overall, 74.4% of participants reported that delirium is very important. More than 95% of participants stated that they routinely assessed POD. In total, 61.4% screened for POD using clinical observation and 37.6% used a delirium screening tool. Although the depth of anesthesia (a POD risk factor) was monitored, electroencephalogram monitoring was unavailable to 30.6% of respondents. Regarding treatment, only 24.1% of respondents used a standard algorithm; 58.5% used individualized treatment.ConclusionOur survey showed that there are high awareness levels among Chinese anesthesiologists regarding the importance of POD. However, routine assessment and monitoring of all patients, including perioperative anesthesia depth monitoring, and a treatment algorithm need to be implemented on a larger scale. According to the results, efforts should be made to improve the knowledge of POD among Chinese anesthesiologists

High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers versus Low PEEP During General Anesthesia for Surgery -a Bayesian individual patient data meta-analysis of three randomized clinical trials

Background: The influence of high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with recruitment maneuvers on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications after surgery is still not definitively established. Bayesian analysis can help to gain further insights from the available data and provide a probabilistic framework that is easier to interpret. Our objective was to estimate the posterior probability that the use of high PEEP with recruitment maneuvers is associated with reduced postoperative pulmonary complications in patients with intermediate-to-high risk under neutral, pessimistic, and optimistic expectations regarding the treatment effect. Methods: Multilevel Bayesian logistic regression analysis on individual patient data from three randomized clinical trials carried out on surgical patients at Intermediate-to-High Risk for postoperative pulmonary complications. The main outcome was the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications in the early postoperative period. We studied the effect of high PEEP with recruitment maneuvers versus Low PEEP Ventilation. Priors were chosen to reflect neutral, pessimistic, and optimistic expectations of the treatment effect. Results: Using a neutral, pessimistic, or optimistic prior, the posterior mean odds ratio (OR) for High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers compared to Low PEEP was 0.85 (95% Credible Interval [CrI] 0.71 to 1.02), 0.87 (0.72 to 1.04), and 0.86 (0.71 to 1.02), respectively. Regardless of prior beliefs, the posterior probability of experiencing a beneficial effect exceeded 90%. Subgroup analysis indicated a more pronounced effect in patients who underwent laparoscopy (OR: 0.67 [0.50 to 0.87]) and those at high risk for PPCs (OR: 0.80 [0.53 to 1.13]). Sensitivity analysis, considering severe postoperative pulmonary complications only or applying a different heterogeneity prior, yielded consistent results. Conclusion: High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers demonstrated a moderate reduction in the probability of PPC occurrence, with a high posterior probability of benefit observed consistently across various prior beliefs, particularly among patients who underwent laparoscopy