Cited by 1,434Respiratory Support and MechanismsAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes

A trial of intraoperative low-tidal-volume ventilation in abdominal surgery

Futier, Emmanuel, Constantin, Jean-Michel, Paugam-Burtz, Catherine, Pascal, Julien, Eurin, Mathilde, Neuschwander, Arthur, Marret, Emmanuel, Beaussier, Marc +9 more·2013·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lung-protective ventilation with the use of low tidal volumes and positive end-expiratory pressure is considered best practice in the care of many critically ill patients. However, its role in anesthetized patients undergoing major surgery is not known. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned 400 adults at intermediate to high risk of pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery to either nonprotective mechanical ventilation or a strategy of lung-protective ventilation. The primary outcome was a composite of major pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications occurring within the first 7 days after surgery. RESULTS: The two intervention groups had similar characteristics at baseline. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 21 of 200 patients (10.5%) assigned to lung-protective ventilation, as compared with 55 of 200 (27.5%) assigned to nonprotective ventilation (relative risk, 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24 to 0.68; P=0.001). Over the 7-day postoperative period, 10 patients (5.0%) assigned to lung-protective ventilation required noninvasive ventilation or intubation for acute respiratory failure, as compared with 34 (17.0%) assigned to nonprotective ventilation (relative risk, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.61; P=0.001). The length of the hospital stay was shorter among patients receiving lung-protective ventilation than among those receiving nonprotective ventilation (mean difference, -2.45 days; 95% CI, -4.17 to -0.72; P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with a practice of nonprotective mechanical ventilation, the use of a lung-protective ventilation strategy in intermediate-risk and high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery was associated with improved clinical outcomes and reduced health care utilization. (IMPROVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01282996.).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1301082

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the most convincing study so far to test the preventive value of lung-protective ventilation in patients without ARDS, intraoperative use of larger tidal volumes increased the rate of postoperative pneumonia by a factor of five (from 1.5% to 8.0%).

    “the intraoperative use of larger tidal volumes (which induce alveolar injury and leak,60 figure 3) increased the rate of postoperative pneumonia by a factor of five (from 1·5% to 8·0%).”

    From The microbiome and critical illness (2016) · cites this paper as [116]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Futier, E., Constantin, J.-M., Paugam-Burtz, C., Pascal, J., Eurin, M., Neuschwander, A., Marret, E., Beaussier, M., Gutton, C., Lefrant, J.-Y., Allaouchiche, B., Verzilli, D., Leone, M., De Jong, A., Bazin, J.-E., Pereira, B., & Jaber, S.
Affiliations
  • Université de Clermont I (FR)
  • Hôpital Beaujon (FR)
  • Hôpital Tenon (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes (FR)
  • Hôpital Edouard Herriot (FR)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand (FR)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2013-08
Volume
369
Issue
5
Pages
428-437
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2162002744
Cited by
1,434
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 70 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 112 · 2020: 101 · 2019: 122 · 2018: 116 · 2017: 123 · 2016: 126 · 2015: 133 · 2014: 137 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 6
FWCI
111.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Keywords
lung-protective ventilation, low tidal volume ventilation, positive end-expiratory pressure, abdominal surgery, postoperative pulmonary complications, postoperative respiratory failure, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation
MeSH terms
Abdomen, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Positive-Pressure Respiration, Postoperative Complications, Respiratory Insufficiency, Digestive System Surgical Procedures, Tidal Volume, Intention to Treat Analysis, Operative Time

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review