Effect of Intensive vs Moderate Alveolar Recruitment Strategies Added to Lung-Protective Ventilation on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Perioperative lung-protective ventilation has been recommended to reduce pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery. The protective role of a small tidal volume (VT) has been established, whereas the added protection afforded by alveolar recruiting strategies remains controversial. Objective: To determine whether an intensive alveolar recruitment strategy could reduce postoperative pulmonary complications, when added to a protective ventilation with small VT. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of patients with hypoxemia after cardiac surgery at a single ICU in Brazil (December 2011-2014). Interventions: Intensive recruitment strategy (n=157) or moderate recruitment strategy (n=163) plus protective ventilation with small VT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Severity of postoperative pulmonary complications computed until hospital discharge, analyzed with a common odds ratio (OR) to detect ordinal shift in distribution of pulmonary complication severity score (0-to-5 scale, 0, no complications; 5, death). Prespecified secondary outcomes were length of stay in the ICU and hospital, incidence of barotrauma, and hospital mortality. Results: All 320 patients (median age, 62 years; IQR, 56-69 years; 125 women [39%]) completed the trial. The intensive recruitment strategy group had a mean 1.8 (95% CI, 1.7 to 2.0) and a median 1.7 (IQR, 1.0-2.0) pulmonary complications score vs 2.1 (95% CI, 2.0-2.3) and 2.0 (IQR, 1.5-3.0) for the moderate strategy group. Overall, the distribution of primary outcome scores shifted consistently in favor of the intensive strategy, with a common OR for lower scores of 1.86 (95% CI, 1.22 to 2.83; P = .003). The mean hospital stay for the moderate group was 12.4 days vs 10.9 days in the intensive group (absolute difference, -1.5 days; 95% CI, -3.1 to -0.3; P = .04). The mean ICU stay for the moderate group was 4.8 days vs 3.8 days for the intensive group (absolute difference, -1.0 days; 95% CI, -1.6 to -0.2; P = .01). Hospital mortality (2.5% in the intensive group vs 4.9% in the moderate group; absolute difference, -2.4%, 95% CI, -7.1% to 2.2%) and barotrauma incidence (0% in the intensive group vs 0.6% in the moderate group; absolute difference, -0.6%; 95% CI, -1.8% to 0.6%; P = .51) did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with hypoxemia after cardiac surgery, the use of an intensive vs a moderate alveolar recruitment strategy resulted in less severe pulmonary complications while in the hospital. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01502332.

Vasopressin versus Norepinephrine in Patients with Vasoplegic Shock after Cardiac Surgery: The VANCS Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Vasoplegic syndrome is a common complication after cardiac surgery and impacts negatively on patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether vasopressin is superior to norepinephrine in reducing postoperative complications in patients with vasoplegic syndrome. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind trial was conducted at the Heart Institute, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil, between January 2012 and March 2014. Patients with vasoplegic shock (defined as mean arterial pressure less than 65 mmHg resistant to fluid challenge and cardiac index greater than 2.2 l · min · m) after cardiac surgery were randomized to receive vasopressin (0.01 to 0.06 U/min) or norepinephrine (10 to 60 µg/min) to maintain arterial pressure. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality or severe complications (stroke, requirement for mechanical ventilation for longer than 48 h, deep sternal wound infection, reoperation, or acute renal failure) within 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 330 patients were randomized, and 300 were infused with one of the study drugs (vasopressin, 149; norepinephrine, 151). The primary outcome occurred in 32% of the vasopressin patients and in 49% of the norepinephrine patients (unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.80; P = 0.0014). Regarding adverse events, the authors found a lower occurrence of atrial fibrillation in the vasopressin group (63.8% vs. 82.1%; P = 0.0004) and no difference between groups in the rates of digital ischemia, mesenteric ischemia, hyponatremia, and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' results suggest that vasopressin can be used as a first-line vasopressor agent in postcardiac surgery vasoplegic shock and improves clinical outcomes.