Background Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) may result in longer duration of in-hospital stay and even mortality. Both thoracic surgery and intraoperative mechanical ventilation settings add considerably to the risk of PPC. It is unclear if one-lung ventilation (OLV) for thoracic surgery with a strategy of intraoperative high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM) reduces PPC, compared to low PEEP without RM. Methods PROTHOR is an international, multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, two-arm trial initiated by investigators of the PROtective VEntilation NETwork. In total, 2378 patients will be randomly assigned to one of two different intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older, scheduled for open thoracic or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery under general anesthesia requiring OLV, with a maximal body mass index of 35 kg/m 2 , and a planned duration of surgery of more than 60 min. Further, the expected duration of OLV shall be longer than two-lung ventilation, and lung separation is planned with a double lumen tube. Patients will be randomly assigned to PEEP of 10 cmH 2 O with lung RM, or PEEP of 5 cmH 2 O without RM. During two-lung ventilation tidal volume is set at 7 mL/kg predicted body weight and, during OLV, it will be decreased to 5 mL/kg. The occurrence of PPC will be recorded as a collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint. Discussion PROTHOR is the first randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with OLV that is adequately powered to compare the effects of intraoperative high PEEP with RM versus low PEEP without RM on PPC. The results of the PROTHOR trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to set intraoperative PEEP during protective ventilation for OLV in thoracic surgery. Trial registration The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02963025 ) on 15 November 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3208-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background CW002 is a benzylisoquinolinium nondepolarizing neuromuscular-blocking drug found to be inactivated by cysteine in preclinical studies. The current study represents a dose escalation clinical trial designed to describe CW002 potency, duration, cardiopulmonary side effects, and histamine release. Methods Healthy subjects anesthetized with sevoflurane/nitrous oxide were divided into five groups (n = 6), each receiving a fixed CW002 dose (0.02, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, or 0.10 mg/kg), and one group (n = 4) receiving 0.14 mg/kg. Blood pressure and heart rate were continuously recorded along with airway dynamic compliance. Neuromuscular blockade was assessed with mechanomyography at the adductor pollicis. Arterial blood was obtained before and after CW002 injection for analysis of plasma histamine concentration. Potency was estimated from a baseline sigmoid Emax model. Results ED50 was found to be 0.036 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.020 to 0.053 mg/kg) and ED95 0.077 mg/kg (95% CI, 0.044 to 0.114 mg/kg). At 0.14 mg/kg (1.8 × ED95), 80% twitch depression occurred in 94 ± 18 s with complete block in 200 ± 87 s. Clinical recovery (25% of maximum twitch) occurred in 34 ± 3.4 min, with a 5 to 95% recovery interval of 35.0 ± 2.7 min. The time to a train-of-four ratio greater than 0.9 ranged from 59 to 86 min. CW002 did not elicit histamine release or significant (greater than 10%) changes in blood pressure, heart rate, or dynamic airway compliance. Conclusions In healthy subjects receiving sevoflurane/nitrous oxide, CW002 at 1.8 × estimated ED95 produces a clinical duration less than 40 min, elicits no histamine release, and has minimal cardiopulmonary side effects.
The review summarizes the procedures now commonly performed by interventional pulmonologists and interventional radiologists. It discusses the anesthetic considerations for and common complications of these procedures to prepare anesthesiologists to safely care for these patients. Investigational techniques are also described.
Background CW002, a novel nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent of intermediate duration, is degraded in vitro by l-cysteine; CW002-induced neuromuscular blockade (NMB) is antagonized in vivo by exogenous l-cysteine.1 Further, Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee–approved studies of safety and efficacy in eight anesthetized monkeys and six cats are described. Methods Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, twitch, and train-of-four were recorded; estimated dose producing 95% twitch inhibition (ED95) for NMB and twitch recovery intervals from 5 to 95% of baseline were derived. Antagonism of 99 to 100% block in monkeys by l-cysteine (50 mg/kg) was tested after bolus doses of approximately 3.75 to 20 × ED95 and after infusions. Vagal and sympathetic autonomic responses were recorded in cats. Dose ratios for [circulatory (ED20) or autonomic (ED50) changes/ED95 (NMB)] were calculated. Results ED95s of CW002 in monkeys and cats were 0.040 and 0.035 mg/kg; l-cysteine readily antagonized block in monkeys: 5 to 95% twitch recovery intervals were shortened to 1.8 to 3.6 min after 3.75 to 10 × ED95 or infusions versus 11.5 to 13.5 min during spontaneous recovery. ED for 20% decrease of mean arterial pressure (n = 27) was 1.06 mg/kg in monkeys; ED for 20% increase of HR (n = 27) was 2.16 mg/kg. ED50s for vagal and sympathetic inhibition in cats were 0.59 and >>0.80 mg/kg (n = 14 and 15). Dose ratios for [circulatory or autonomic changes/ED95 (NMB)] were all more than 15 × ED95. Conclusions The data further verify the neuromuscular blocking properties of CW002, including rapid reversal by l-cysteine of 100% NMB under several circumstances. A notable lack of autonomic or circulatory effects provided added proof of safety and efficacy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.