Impact of a positive end-expiratory pressure strategy on oxygenation, respiratory compliance, and hemodynamics during laparoscopic surgery in non-obese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Arinova Gulfairus A.1,Yukhnevich Yekaterina A.2,Khamitova Zaukiya K.1,Kim Sergey I.3,Zhumabayev Murat B.1,Berdiyarova Gulbanu S.4,Shalekenov Sanzhar B.1,Mukatova Irina Y.5,Yaroshetskiy Andrey I.6

Affiliation:

1. National Research Oncology Center

2. Karaganda Medical University

3. Multidisciplinary hospitals named after Professor H.J.Makazhanov

4. Kazakh-Russian Medical University

5. Astana Medical University

6. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Abstract

Abstract Background. Higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during laparoscopic surgery may increase oxygenation and respiratory compliance. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the impact of different intraoperative PEEP strategies on arterial oxygenation, compliance, and hemodynamics during laparoscopic surgery in non-obese patients. Methods. We searched RCTs in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from January 2012 to January 2022 comparing the different intraoperative PEEP (Low PEEP (LPEEP): 0 mbar; Moderate PEEP (MPEEP): 5–8 mbar; high PEEP (HPEEP): >8 mbar; individualized PEEP - iPEEP) on arterial oxygenation, respiratory compliance (Cdyn), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR). We calculated mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and predictive intervals (PI) using random-effects models. The Cochrane Bias Risk Assessment Tool was applied. Results. 21 RCTs (n = 1554) met the inclusion criteria. HPEEP vs LPEEP increased PaO2 (+ 29.38 [16.20; 42.56] mmHg, p < 0.0001) or PaO2/FiO2 (+ 36.7 [+ 2.23; +71.70] mmHg, p = 0.04). HPEEP vs MPEEP increased PaO2 (+ 22.00 [+ 1.11; +42.88] mmHg, p = 0.04) or PaO2/FiO2 (+ 42.7 [+ 2.74; +82.67] mmHg, p = 0.04). iPEEP vs MPEEP increased PaO2/FiO2 (+ 115.2 [+ 87.21; +143.20] mmHg, p < 0.001). MPEEP vs LPEP, and HPEEP vs MPEEP increased PaO2 or PaO2/FiO2 significantly with different heterogeneity. HPEEP vs LPEEP increased Cdyn (+ 7.87 [+ 1.49; +14.25] ml/mbar, p = 0.02). MPEEP vs LPEEP, and HPEEP vs MPEEP didn’t impact Cdyn (p = 0.14 and 0.38, respectively). iPEEP vs LPEEP decreased driving pressure (-4.13 [-2.63; -5.63] mbar, p < 0.001). No significant differences in MAP or HR were found between any subgroups. Conclusion. HPEEP and iPEEP during PNP in non-obese patients may improve oxygenation, increase Cdyn without clinically significant changes in MAP and HR. MPEEP could be insufficient to increase respiratory compliance and improve oxygenation. LPEEP could lead to hypoxemia and decreased respiratory compliance. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022362379; registered October 09, 2022

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3