Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2023
Low tidal volume ventilation for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a secondary analysis of a randomised clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Heliox ventilation promotes pulmonary circulation and cardiac function in elderly hypertensive patients: a randomized controlled trial.Medical gas research · 2026Trial
- Association between tidal volume and mortality in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomedical reports · 2026Article
- Postoperative Pulmonary Complications After Laparoscopic Surgery: Risk Factors and Predictive Scores.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe recently reported the results for a large randomized controlled trial of low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) versus conventional tidal volume (CTVV) during major surgery when positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) was equal between groups. We found no difference in postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients who received LTVV. However, in the subgroup of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, LTVV was associated with a numerically lower rate of PPCs after surgery. We aimed to further assess the relationship between LTVV versus CTVV during laparoscopic surgery.
methodsWe conducted a post-hoc analysis of this pre-specified subgroup. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with an applied PEEP of 5 cmH
resultsThree hundred twenty-eight patients (27.2%) underwent laparoscopic surgeries, with 158 (48.2%) randomised to LTVV. Fifty two of 157 patients (33.1%) assigned to LTVV and 72 of 169 (42.6%) assigned to conventional tidal volume developed PPCs within 7 days (unadjusted absolute difference, - 9.48 [95% CI, - 19.86 to 1.05]; p = 0.076). After adjusting for pre-specified confounders, the LTVV group had a lower incidence of the primary outcome than patients receiving CTVV (adjusted absolute difference, - 10.36 [95% CI, - 20.52 to - 0.20]; p = 0.046).
conclusionIn this post-hoc analysis of a large, randomised trial of LTVV we found that during laparoscopic surgeries, LTVV was associated with a significantly reduced PPCs compared to CTVV when PEEP was applied equally between both groups.
trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry no: 12614000790640.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.