2022Frontiers in Veterinary ScienceOpen access

Intraoperative Protective Mechanical Ventilation in Dogs: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Renata Ramos Rodrigues, Aline Magalhães Ambrósio, Aline M. Engbruch, Lucas Alaião Gonçalves, Paula Abreu Villela, Ana Flávia Sanchez, Denise Tabacchi Fantoni

Open full text 6 citations

Abstract

Objective To evaluate gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamic impact of mechanical ventilation with low tidal volume (VT) in dogs with the use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or preceded by alveolar recruitment maneuver (ARM). Study Design Prospective randomized clinical trial. Animals Twenty-one healthy client-owned mesocephalic healthy dogs, 1–7 years old, weighing 10–20 kg, and body condition scores 4–6/9 admitted for periodontal treatment. Methods Isoflurane-anesthetized dogs in dorsal recumbency were ventilated until 1 h with a volume-controlled ventilation mode using 8 mL kg−1of VT. The dogs were distributed in 2 groups: in the ARM group, PEEP starts in 0 cmH2O, increasing gradually 5 cmH2O every 3 min, until reach 15 cmH2O and decreasing in the same steps until 5 cmH2O, maintaining this value until the end; and PEEP group, in which the pressure 5 cmH2O was instituted from the beginning of anesthesia and maintained the same level up to the end of the anesthesia. Cardiopulmonary, metabolic, oxygenation parameters, and respiratory mechanics were recorded after the anesthesia induction (baseline—BL), 15, 45, and 75 min after BL and during the recovery. Results The ARM increased the static compliance (Cst) (15 min after baseline) when compared with baseline moment (24.9 ± 5.8 mL cmH20−1vs. 20.7 ± 5.4 mL cmH20−1–p= 0.0364), oxygenation index (PaO2/FIO2) (505.6 ± 59.2 mmHg vs. 461.2 ± 41.0 mmHg—p= 0.0453) and reduced the shunt fraction (3.4 ± 2.4% vs. 5.5 ± 1.6%—p= 0.062). In the PEEP group, no statistical differences were observed concerning the variables evaluated. At the beginning of the evaluation, the driving pressure (DP) before ARM was significantly greater than all other evaluation time points (6.9 ± 1.8 cmH20). Conclusions and Clinical Relevance The use of 8 mL kg−1of VTand 5 cmH20 PEEP without ARM maintain adequate oxygenation and mechanical ventilation in dental surgeries for up to 1 h. The use of ARM slightly improved compliance and oxygenation during the maneuver.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To evaluate gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamic impact of mechanical ventilation with low tidal volume (VT) in dogs with the use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or preceded by alveolar recruitment maneuver (ARM). Study Design Prospective randomized clinical trial. Animals Twenty-one healthy client-owned mesocephalic healthy dogs, 1–7 years old, weighing 10–20 kg, and body condition scores 4–6/9 admitted for periodontal treatment. Methods Isoflurane-anesthetized dogs in dorsal recumbency were ventilated until 1 h with a volume-controlled ventilation mode using 8 mL kg−1of VT. The dogs were distributed in 2 groups: in the ARM group, PEEP starts in 0 cmH2O, increasing gradually 5 cmH2O every 3 min, until reach 15 cmH2O and decreasing in the same steps until 5 cmH2O, maintaining this value until the end; and PEEP group, in which the pressure 5 cmH2O was instituted from the beginning of anesthesia and maintained the same level up to the end of the anesthesia. Cardiopulmonary, metabolic, oxygenation parameters, and respiratory mechanics were recorded after the anesthesia induction (baseline—BL), 15, 45, and 75 min after BL and during the recovery. Results The ARM increased the static compliance (Cst) (15 min after baseline) when compared with baseline moment (24.9 ± 5.8 mL cmH20−1vs. 20.7 ± 5.4 mL cmH20−1–p= 0.0364), oxygenation index (PaO2/FIO2) (505.6 ± 59.2 mmHg vs. 461.2 ± 41.0 mmHg—p= 0.0453) and reduced the shunt fraction (3.4 ± 2.4% vs. 5.5 ± 1.6%—p= 0.062). In the PEEP group, no statistical differences were observed concerning the variables evaluated. At the beginning of the evaluation, the driving pressure (DP) before ARM was significantly greater than all other evaluation time points (6.9 ± 1.8 cmH20). Conclusions and Clinical Relevance The use of 8 mL kg−1of VTand 5 cmH20 PEEP without ARM maintain adequate oxygenation and mechanical ventilation in dental surgeries for up to 1 h. The use of ARM slightly improved compliance and oxygenation during the maneuver.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To evaluate gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamic impact of mechanical ventilation with low tidal volume (VT) in dogs with the use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or preceded by alveolar recruitment maneuver (ARM). Study Design Prospective randomized clinical trial. Animals Twenty-one healthy client-owned mesocephalic healthy dogs, 1–7 years old, weighing 10–20 kg, and body condition scores 4–6/9 admitted for periodontal treatment. Methods Isoflurane-anesthetized dogs in dorsal recumbency were ventilated until 1 h with a volume-controlled ventilation mode using 8 mL kg−1of VT. The dogs were distributed in 2 groups: in the ARM group, PEEP starts in 0 cmH2O, increasing gradually 5 cmH2O every 3 min, until reach 15 cmH2O and decreasing in the same steps until 5 cmH2O, maintaining this value until the end; and PEEP group, in which the pressure 5 cmH2O was instituted from the beginning of anesthesia and maintained the same level up to the end of the anesthesia. Cardiopulmonary, metabolic, oxygenation parameters, and respiratory mechanics were recorded after the anesthesia induction (baseline—BL), 15, 45, and 75 min after BL and during the recovery. Results The ARM increased the static compliance (Cst) (15 min after baseline) when compared with baseline moment (24.9 ± 5.8 mL cmH20−1vs. 20.7 ± 5.4 mL cmH20−1–p= 0.0364), oxygenation index (PaO2/FIO2) (505.6 ± 59.2 mmHg vs. 461.2 ± 41.0 mmHg—p= 0.0453) and reduced the shunt fraction (3.4 ± 2.4% vs. 5.5 ± 1.6%—p= 0.062). In the PEEP group, no statistical differences were observed concerning the variables evaluated. At the beginning of the evaluation, the driving pressure (DP) before ARM was significantly greater than all other evaluation time points (6.9 ± 1.8 cmH20). Conclusions and Clinical Relevance The use of 8 mL kg−1of VTand 5 cmH20 PEEP without ARM maintain adequate oxygenation and mechanical ventilation in dental surgeries for up to 1 h. The use of ARM slightly improved compliance and oxygenation during the maneuver.

Key concepts: Randomized controlled trial, Medicine, Mechanical ventilation, Ventilation (architecture), Anesthesia, Surgery, Engineering, Mechanical engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Intraoperative Protective Mechanical Ventilation in Dogs: A Randomized Clinical Trial — Research Paper | ScholarLens