Intérêt de la ventilation non invasive (VNI) systématique en post-opératoire immédiat d’une résection pulmonaire pour prévenir les complications pulmonaires chez les patients BPCO (essai POPVNI)

[Postoperative complications after major lung resection]

INTRODUCTION

The advent of the minimally invasive techniques has allowed an expansion of the indications for thoracic surgery, particularly in older patients and those with more comorbidities. However, the rate of postoperative complications has remained stable.

STATE OF THE ART

Postoperative complications are defined as any variation from the normal course. They occur in 30% but majority of them are minor. The 30-day mortality rate for lung resection varies range between 2 % and 3% in the literature. Complications can be classified as: (1) early (occurring in the first 24hours) including both "generic" surgical complications (especially postoperative bleeding) and complications more specific to lung surgery (Acute respiratory syndrome, atelectasis); (2) in-hospital complications and those occurring during the first 3 months; these are dominated by infectious events in particular pneumonia but also bronchial (bronchopleural fistula), pleural (pneumothorax, hydrothorax) or cardiac complications; (3) late complications are dominated by chronic pain, affecting 60% of patients having a thoracotomy at three months. Lobectomy is the most common lung resection. Pneumonectomy is a distinct procedure requiring a specific peri- and postoperative management. Right pneumonectomy is associated with a higher risk with a treatment related-mortality ranging between 7 and 10%.

CONCLUSION

Major lung resection has benefited from minimally invasive approaches and fast track to surgery. However, it is important to note the occurrence of new and specific complications related to those news surgical access.

Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for prevention of complications after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary complications are often seen during the postoperative period following lung resection for patients with lung cancer. Some situations such as intubation, a long stay in the intensive care unit, the high cost of antibiotics and mortality may be avoided with the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is widely used in hospitals, and is thought to reduce the number of pulmonary complications and mortality after this type of surgery. Therefore, a systematic review is needed to critically assess the benefits and harms of NIPPV for patients undergoing lung resection. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of NIPPV for preventing complications in patients following pulmonary resection for lung cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and PEDro until 21 December 2018, to identify potentially eligible trials. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches. We searched the reference lists of relevant papers and contacted experts in the field for information about additional published and unpublished studies. We also searched the Register of Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) to identify ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials that compared NIPPV in the immediate postoperative period after pulmonary resection with no intervention or conventional respiratory therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected data and assessed trial risk of bias. Where possible, we pooled data from the individual studies using a fixed-effect model (quantitative synthesis), but where this was not possible we tabulated or presented the data in the main text (qualitative synthesis). Where substantial heterogeneity existed, we applied a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 190 references retrieved from the searches, 7 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) (1 identified with the new search) and 1 quasi-randomised trial fulfilled the eligibility criteria for this review, including a total of 486 patients. Five studies described quantitative measures of pulmonary complications, with pooled data showing no difference between NIPPV compared with no intervention (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.47). Three studies reported intubation rates and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.20). Five studies reported measures of mortality on completion of the intervention period. There was no statistical difference between the groups for this outcome (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.53). Similar results were observed in the subgroup analysis considering ventilatory mode (bi-level versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). No study evaluated the postoperative use of antibiotics. Two studies reported the length of intensive care unit stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.75; 95% CI -3.93 to 2.43). Four studies reported the length of hospital stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.12; 95% CI -6.15 to 5.90). None of the studies described any complications related to NIPPV. Of the seven included studies, four studies were considered as 'low risk of bias' in all domains, two studies were considered 'high risk of bias' for the allocation concealment domain, and one of these was also considered 'high risk of bias' for random sequence generation. One other study was considered 'high risk of bias' for including participants with more severe disease. The new study identified could not be included in the meta-analysis as its intervention differed from the other studies (use of pre and postoperative NIPPV in the same population).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that there was no additional benefit of using NIPPV in the postoperative period after pulmonary resection for all outcomes analysed (pulmonary complications, rate of intubation, mortality, postoperative consumption of antibiotics, length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay and adverse effects related to NIPPV). However, the quality of evidence is 'very low', 'low' and 'moderate' since there were few studies, with small sample size and low frequency of outcomes. New well-designed and well-conducted randomised trials are needed to answer the questions of this review with greater certainty.

Prophylactic continuous positive airway pressure after pulmonary lobectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Despite advances in perioperative care and surgical techniques, patients undergoing pulmonary lobectomy are still at high risk for postoperative complications. Among interventions expected to reduce complications, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a discussed option. This trial aims to test the hypothesis whether prophylactic application of CPAP following pulmonary lobectomy can reduce postoperative complications.

Methods

The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer scheduled for pulmonary lobectomy were eligible and were trained for the use of CPAP interface. The control group received standard postoperative pain management and physiotherapy; in addition, the study group received CPAP (PEEP 8-12 cmH₂O, 2 hours thrice daily for three days).

Results

After the appropriate selection, 163 patients were considered for the analysis: 82 patients constituted the control group, 81 the study group. The two groups were substantially comparable for preoperative parameters. The rate of postoperative complications was lower in the study group (24.7% vs. 43.9%; P=0.015) as well as the hospital stay (6 vs. 7 days; P=0.031). The stepwise logistic regression model identified: CPAP [odd ratio (OR): 0.3026, CI: 0.1389-0.6591], smoke habits [OR: 2.5835, confidence interval (CI): 1.0331-6.4610] and length of surgery in minutes (OR: 1.0102, CI: 1.0042-1.0163) as regressors on postoperative complications.

Conclusions

The present trial demonstrated that prophylactic application of CPAP during the postoperative period after pulmonary lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer was effective in prevent postoperative complications.

Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for prevention of complications after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary complications are often observed during the postoperative period of lung resection for patients with lung cancer. Some conditions such as intubation, a long stay in the intensive care unit, the high cost of antibiotics and mortality may be avoided with the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is widely accepted and often used in hospitals, and may reduce the number of pulmonary complications and mortality after this type of surgery. Therefore, a systematic review is required to map and critically assess the benefits and harms of NIPPV for patients undergoing lung resection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of NIPPV for preventing complications in patients who underwent pulmonary resection for lung cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and PEDro, to identify potentially eligible trials. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches. The databases were last searched on 17 March 2015. We searched the reference lists of relevant papers and contacted experts in the field for information about additional published and unpublished studies. We also searched the Register of Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) to identify ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials that compared NIPPV in the immediate postoperative period after pulmonary resection with no intervention or conventional respiratory therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors collected data and assessed trial risk of bias. Where possible, we pooled data from the individual studies using a fixed-effect model (quantitative synthesis), but where this was not possible we tabulated or presented the data in the main text (qualitative synthesis). Where substantial heterogeneity existed, we applied a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 155 references retrieved from searches, 6 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and 1 quasi-randomised trial fulfilled the eligibility criteria for this review, including a total of 436 patients. Five studies described quantitative measures of pulmonary complications, with pooled data showing no difference between NIPPV compared with no intervention (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.47). Three studies reported intubation rates and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.20). Five studies reported measures of mortality on completion of the intervention period. There was no statistical difference between the groups for this outcome (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.53). Similar results were observed in the subgroup analysis considering ventilatory mode (bi-level versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). No study evaluated the postoperative consumption of antibiotics. Two studies reported the length of intensive care unit stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.75; 95% CI -3.93 to 2.43). Four studies reported the length of hospital stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.12; 95% CI -6.15 to 5.90). None of the studies described any complications related to NIPPV. Of the seven included studies, four studies were considered as 'low risk of bias' in all domains, two studies were considered 'high risk of bias' for the allocation concealment domain, and one of these was also considered 'high risk of bias' for random sequence generation. One other study was considered 'high risk of bias' for including participants with more severe disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that there was no additional benefit of using NIPPV in postoperative pulmonary resection for all outcomes analysed (pulmonary complications, rate of intubation, mortality, rate of non-pulmonary complications, postoperative consumption of antibiotics, length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay and adverse effects related to NIPPV). However, the quality of evidence is 'very low', 'low' and 'moderate' since there were few studies, with small sample size and low frequency of outcomes. New well-designed and well-conducted randomised trials are needed to answer the questions of this review with greater certainty.