Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-A01698-41 | Other Identifier | CHU de Rouen |
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
Lung cancer is a common disease, and more than 8,000 patients in France undergo lobectomy or pulmonary segmentectomy each year. This surgery remains associated with significant postoperative pulmonary complications, whose incidence ranges from 15% to 49% depending on the study (1). The main complication is pulmonary atelectasis, which provides a favorable setting for the development of postoperative pneumonia.
In thoracic surgery, the operated lung is excluded, and one-lung ventilation is performed on the contralateral lung. During surgery, several strategies exist to prevent atelectasis during one-lung ventilation, known as protective ventilation strategies (2). At the end of the procedure, reventilation allows re-expansion of the previously excluded lung.
However, pulmonary reventilation induces the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines and causes endothelial dysfunction, which may lead to pulmonary edema, thereby negating the benefits of intraoperative protective ventilation. Conversely, insufficient re-expansion may result in persistent postoperative atelectasis, whereas excessive re-expansion can cause volutrauma, alveolar trauma, and/or barotrauma to the operated lung (3).
Several reventilation techniques are currently used, but to our knowledge, the impact of reventilation itself has never been specifically studied. The first, empirical technique, consists of reventilating both lungs using the accessory circuit and the adjustable pressure-limiting (APL) valve, manually bagging the patient over several respiratory cycles (4). The main drawback of this method is the lack of monitoring of insufflated volumes and pressures.
The second, more recent technique, consists of reventilating the patient using the anesthesia machine circuit in controlled ventilation mode, which allows for precise monitoring of pressures and insufflated volumes (5). This approach provides real-time monitoring of lung re-expansion and could therefore be less harmful than the empirical method.
Thus, the objective of this study is to compare postoperative pulmonary complications between patients who underwent lung re-expansion using the accessory circuit and those who underwent lung re-expansion using the anesthesia machine circuit in controlled ventilation mode.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bipulmonary reventilation arm using the accessory circuit | Other | As lobectomy and segmentectomy are procedures of differing complexity, stratification according to the type of surgery will ensure a balanced distribution between the study groups. However, despite their differences, both procedures have similar operative durations and require complete atelectasis of the operated lung. The main distinction lies in the amount of pulmonary parenchyma removed (approximately 10% for segmentectomy and 30% for lobectomy). This approach helps minimize bias related to variability in surgical procedures, as lobectomy is generally more invasive than segmentectomy. Consequently, each type of surgery will be represented comparably in both study groups. This stratification ensures that any differences observed between the groups can be attributed to the studied variable rather than to the type of surgical procedure. |
|
| Bipulmonary reventilation arm under controlled ventilation | Experimental | As lobectomy and segmentectomy are procedures of differing complexity, stratification according to the type of surgery will ensure a balanced distribution between the study groups. However, despite their differences, both procedures have similar operative durations and require complete atelectasis of the operated lung. The main distinction lies in the amount of pulmonary parenchyma removed (approximately 10% for segmentectomy and 30% for lobectomy). This approach helps minimize bias related to variability in surgical procedures, as lobectomy is generally more invasive than segmentectomy. Consequently, each type of surgery will be represented comparably in both study groups. This stratification ensures that any differences observed between the groups can be attributed to the studied variable rather than to the type of surgical procedure. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bipulmonary Reventilation using the accessory circuit | Procedure | Bipulmonary Reventilation using the accessory circuit |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Postoperative pulmonary complications | The evaluation of the primary endpoint will be performed by an anesthesiologist blinded to the lung re-expansion technique used. The composite endpoint will consist of the occurrence, within the first 7 postoperative days, of at least one pulmonary complications (postoperative pneumonia, pleural effusion, postoperative atelectasis, pneumothorax, bronchospasm, or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)). | 7 postoperative days |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of postoperative pulmonary complications | To compare the number of postoperative pulmonary complications between a group of patients who underwent a lung re-expansion technique using the accessory circuit and a group of patients who underwent a lung re-expansion technique using the machine circuit under controlled ventilation. | 7 postoperative days |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nell Marty | Contact | 0232888265 | nell.marty@chu-rouen.fr |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHU d'AMIENS | Amiens | 80054 | France |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
2 arms in the study
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Bipulmonary Reventilation under controlled ventilation | Procedure | Bipulmonary Reventilation under controlled ventilation |
|
| Number of Death | To compare the death level between a group of patients who underwent a lung re-expansion technique using the accessory circuit and a group of patients who underwent a lung re-expansion technique using the machine circuit under controlled ventilation. | 30 postopeatives days |
| Clinique Victor Pauchet | Amiens | 80094 | France |
|
| CHU de LILLE | Lille | 59037 | France |
|
| CHU de ROUEN | Rouen | 76031 | France |
|
| Hopital Foch | Suresnes | 92150 | France |
|