Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24961718›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2014

Effect of protective ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Tianzhu Tao, Lulong Bo, Feng Chen, Qun Xie, Yun Zou, Baoji Hu, Jinbao Li, Xiaoming Deng

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Is Mechanical Power the One Ring to Rule Them All?American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tianzhu TaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Lulong BoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Feng ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Qun XieDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Yun ZouDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Baoji HuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jinbao LiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Xiaoming DengDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Changhai Hospital · CNSecond Military Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether anaesthetised patients undergoing surgery could benefit from intraoperative protective ventilation strategies.

methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched up to February 2014. Eligible studies evaluated protective ventilation versus conventional ventilation in anaesthetised patients without lung injury at the onset of mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications. Included studies must report at least one of the following end points: the incidence of atelectasis or acute lung injury or pulmonary infections.

resultsFour studies (594 patients) were included. Meta-analysis using a random effects model showed a significant decrease in the incidence of atelectasis (OR=0.36; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.60; p<0.0001; I(2)=0%) and pulmonary infections (OR=0.30; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.68; p=0.004; I(2)=20%) in patients receiving protective ventilation. Ventilation with protective strategies did not reduce the incidence of acute lung injury (OR=0.40; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.15; p=0.28; I(2)=12%), all-cause mortality (OR=0.77; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.79; p=0.54; I(2)=0%), length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference (WMD)=-0.52 day, 95% CI -4.53 to 3.48 day; p=0.80; I(2)=63%) or length of intensive care unit stay (WMD=-0.55 day, 95% CI -2.19 to 1.09 day; p=0.51; I(2)=39%).

conclusionsIntraoperative use of protective ventilation strategies has the potential to reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia. Prospective, well-designed clinical trials are warranted to confirm the beneficial effects of protective ventilation strategies in surgical patients.

Indexed as

Intraoperative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRespiration, ArtificialAnesthesia, GeneralHumansLung DiseasesPostoperative ComplicationsProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID24961718
PMCPMC4078782
OpenAlexW2155378163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.