Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-A00265-52 | Other Identifier | ANSM |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of this study is to compare the effects of a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment (high PEEP levels adjusted according to driving pressure and recruitment maneuvers) with that of a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension (low PEEP level without recruitment maneuver) on postoperative respiratory failure and mortality in patients receiving low VT ventilation during emergency abdominal surgery.
Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are the second most common surgical complication and adversely influence surgical morbidity. Postoperative respiratory failure (PRF) is one of the most serious pulmonary complication.
Two hypotheses can be forward by the literature. First, a low VT lung protective ventilation in combination with a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension by using low PEEP level (and without recruitment maneuver) could improve postoperative outcome while reducing the risk of hemodynamic alterations or, second, could increase the risk of PRF compared with a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment using higher PEEP level adjusted according to driving pressure in combination with recruitment maneuvers in adult patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Given the uncertainties, and in order to determine the impact of lung protective ventilation strategies on clinical outcomes of high-risk surgical patients, a randomized trial is needed.
Our primary hypothesis is that, during low VT ventilation, a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment by using high PEEP levels adjusted according to driving pressure in combination with recruitment maneuvers could be more effective at reducing PRF and mortality after emergency abdominal surgery than a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension by using lower PEEP without recruitment maneuver.
Given the number of patients for whom the question applies, the prevalence and the burden of PPCs, the study can have significant clinical importance and public health implications.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low PEEP group | Active Comparator | Patients will receive a PEEP level ≤5 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers |
|
| Driving-pressure-guided group | Experimental | Patients will receive PEEP levels individually set at the highest possible value (up to 15 cmH2O) providing a driving pressure (airway plateau pressure minus PEEP) lower than 13 cmH2O, in addition to recruitment maneuvers |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Driving-pressure-guided group | Other | Patients will receive PEEP levels individually set at the highest possible value (up to 15 cmH2O) providing a driving pressure (airway plateau pressure minus PEEP) lower than 13 cmH2O, in addition to recruitment maneuvers. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative respiratory failure | Composite criteria :
If at least one of these 4 criteria is answered yes, the composite criterion (i.e. the primary outcome) will be answered yes | Hospital discharge - Up to day 30 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative pulmonary complications | Hypoxemia, pneumonia? development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) | Day 30 |
| Postoperative extra-pulmonary complications | sepsis and septic shock, renal dysfunction |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Emmanuel Futier | University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University hospital | Angers | France | ||||
| Hospital |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40839096 | Result | Futier E, De Jong A, Cirenei C, Godet T, Jabaudon M, Constantin JM, Grillot N, Bouzat P, Henry L, Margetis D, Lebuffe G, Garnier M, Lambert C, Pereira B, Jaber S; IMPROVE-2 Trial investigators. Personalized driving pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure in patients at risk of postoperative respiratory failure (IMPROVE-2): a multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial. Intensive Care Med. 2025 Oct;51(10):1797-1808. doi: 10.1007/s00134-025-08082-x. Epub 2025 Aug 21. | |
| 35523498 |
Not provided
Not provided
The French National Data Safety Authority (CNIL) forbids making data freely available without prior agreement. Thus, the data underlying study findings cannot be made freely available because of ethical and legal restrictions. However, individual participant data underlying the results reported in the manuscript (text, tables, figures, and appendices) can be obtained after deidentification. Data can be obtained upon request from the IMPROVE-2 steering committee. Readers may contact: efutier@chu-clermontferrand.fr to request the data.
The data cannot be freely available for the reasons mentioned above. Data access can be only possible after scientific assessment and data sharing agreement, detailing the type of data requested. This data sharing agreement has to be signed between applicants and the sponsor, Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital.
Beginning 6 months following article publication. No end date
. Data can be obtained upon request from the IMPROVE-2 steering committee. Readers may contact: efutier@chu-clermontferrand.fr to request the data.
Not provided
Not provided
Multicenter, prospective, randomized, stratified, parallel-group clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment and concealed allocation of patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery using low VT lung-protective ventilation to a strategy of minimal alveolar distension using low PEEP level or to a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment (higher PEEP level individually titrated to minimize the driving pressure in addition to recruitment maneuvers)
Not provided
Not provided
It will not be possible to mask the assigned ventilation strategy from the treating clinicians because they have an ethical responsibility to ensure patient safety during the emergency procedures. However, procedures will be put in place to minimize the possibility of bias arising because research staff becomes aware of trial group allocation. At each participating center, patients will be followed up for primary and secondary endpoints by members of the research staff who will be unaware of the trial group allocation. Information on whether the primary and secondary outcomes occur will be collected and entered into the electronic web-based case report form (eCRF) by trial or clinical trained personal (clinical research associate), blinded to the allocation group, under the supervision of the local principal investigator (PI) or designee who will also be unaware of the trial group allocation.
| Low PEEP | Other | Patients will receive a PEEP level ≤5 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers |
|
| Day 30 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 1 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 2 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 3 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 4 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 5 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 6 |
| SOFA | Sequential-related Organ Failure Assessment | Day 7 |
| Ventilator-free days | The number of days alive and with unassisted breathing | Day 30 |
| Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation | Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation from randomization to first tracheal extubation | Up to Day 30 |
| Total duration of mechanical ventilation | Total duration of mechanical ventilation (additive, for all épisodes) | Up to Day 30 |
| Time to successful tracheal extubation | Absence of ventilatory support during the first 48 hours after extubation | 48 hours |
| Total volume of intraoperative fluids | Total volume of intraoperative fluids (crystalloids and colloids) | Day 1 |
| Median norepinephrine doses during surgery | µg/kg/min | Day 1 |
| Median phenylephrine doses during surgery | µg/kg/min | Day 1 |
| Median ephedrine doses during surgery | µg/kg/min | Day 1 |
| Intensive care unit (ICU)-free days | Intensive care unit (ICU)-free days | Day 30 |
| Duration of ICU stay | Duration of ICU stay | Up to day 90 |
| Duration of hospital stay | Duration of hospital stay | Up to day 90 |
| All-cause mortality | All-cause mortality | Day 30 |
| All-cause mortality | All-cause mortality | Day 90 |
| Time to death | Time to death (Days) | Up to 90 days |
| Hemodynamic instability | Hemodynamic instability ventilatory-related defined as a drop of arterial systolic pressure below 80 mmHg for more than 5 minutes not responding to treatment | Up to day 30 |
| Pneumothorax | Pneumothorax ventilatory-related | Up to day 30 |
| Annecy |
| France |
| University hospital | Besançon | France |
| University Hospital | Bordeaux | France |
| Hospital | Chalon-sur-Saône | France |
| University hospital | Clermont-Ferrand | France |
| University hospital | Dijon | France |
| University hospital | Grenoble | France |
| University hospital | Le Mans | France |
| University hospital | Lille | France |
| University hospital | Lyon | France |
| University hospital | Marseile | France |
| Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille | Marseille | France |
| Institut Paoli Calmette | Marseille | France |
| University hospital | Marseille | France |
| University hospital | Montpellier | France |
| University Hospital | Nantes | France |
| University hospital | Nice | France |
| University hospital | Nîmes | France |
| Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris | Paris | France |
| Hospital | Périgueux | France |
| University hospital | Pointe à Pitre | 97159 | France |
| University hospital | Rennes | France |
| University hospital | Saint-Etienne | France |
| University hospital | Strasbourg | France |
| Hospital | Suresnes | France |
| University hospital | Toulouse | France |
| Hospital | Valenciennes | France |
| Derived |
| Khaled L, Godet T, Jaber S, Chanques G, Asehnoune K, Bourdier J, Araujo L, Futier E, Pereira B. Intraoperative protective mechanical ventilation in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery: the multicentre prospective randomised IMPROVE-2 study protocol. BMJ Open. 2022 May 6;12(5):e054823. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054823. |