Intra‐operative ventilation strategies and their impact on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis of randomised trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Postoperative pulmonary complications are common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, the optimal intra-operative ventilation strategy to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intra-operative ventilation strategy, including tidal volumes, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and use of recruitment manoeuvres on the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in adults having non-cardiothoracic surgery. METHODS: Relevant databases were searched to identify randomised controlled trials that directly compared intra-operative ventilation strategies among surgical patients who were followed up for > 24 hours postoperatively and reported at least one outcome of interest. RESULTS: A total of 51 randomised controlled trials were included. Compared with a high tidal volume/zero PEEP strategy, low tidal volume strategies likely reduced the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications when combined with: high PEEP (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95%CI 0.22-0.87); high PEEP with recruitment manoeuvres (RR 0.60, 95%CI 0.49-0.75); personalised PEEP with recruitment manoeuvres (RR 0.53, 95%CI 0.42-0.69); low PEEP (RR 0.63, 95%CI 0.50-0.78); and low PEEP with recruitment manoeuvres (RR 0.65, 95%CI 0.46-0.93) (all moderate certainty evidence). Compared with a low tidal volume/low PEEP strategy, a low tidal volume strategy with personalised PEEP likely reduces the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (RR 0.85, 95%CI 0.73-0.99, moderate certainty). DISCUSSION: Among patients undergoing non-cardiothoracic surgery, the use of intra-operative low tidal volume ventilation with a range of acceptable PEEP levels likely reduced the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications compared with high tidal volumes and zero PEEP. This study highlights the need for implementation research at both the provider and system levels to improve intra-operative adherence to lung protective ventilation strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.027 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".