Intraoperative Protective Mechanical Ventilation in Patients Requiring Emergency Abdominal Surgery

NCT ID: NCT03987789

Last Updated: 2022-10-31

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

707 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-02-18

Study Completion Date

2022-10-27

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

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.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

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.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Emergency Abdominal Surgery Mechanical Ventilation General Anesthesia Postoperative Morbidity

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

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)
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors
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.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Low PEEP group

Patients will receive a PEEP level ≤5 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Low PEEP

Intervention Type OTHER

Patients will receive a PEEP level ≤5 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers

Driving-pressure-guided group

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

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Driving-pressure-guided group

Intervention Type 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.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Driving-pressure-guided group

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.

Intervention Type OTHER

Low PEEP

Patients will receive a PEEP level ≤5 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Adult (≥18 years)
* Patients requiring emergency (defined by the need to proceed to surgery within a few hours after diagnosis)
* Laparoscopic or non-laparoscopic abdominal surgery under general anesthesia and with an expected duration of at least two hours

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients already receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours before enrollment
* Intracranial hypertension
* Chronic respiratory disease requiring oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation at home
* Undrained pneumothorax or subcutaneous emphysema
* Patients for which death is deemed imminent and inevitable or patients with an underlying disease process with a life expectancy of less than 3 month
* Body mass index (BMI) \>40 kg/m2
* Pregnant or breastfeeding women
* Patients already enrolled in the IMPROVE-2 trial
* Participation in a confounding trial with mortality or PRF as the main endpoint
* Patient's or relative's refusal to participate
* Guardianship or trusteeship patient
* No affiliation to the Social Security system
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Emmanuel Futier

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

CHU de Clermont-Ferrand

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University hospital

Angers, , France

Site Status

Hospital

Annecy, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Besançon, , France

Site Status

University Hospital

Bordeaux, , France

Site Status

Hospital

Chalon-sur-Saône, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Clermont-Ferrand, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Dijon, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Grenoble, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Le Mans, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Lille, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Lyon, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Marseile, , France

Site Status

Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille

Marseille, , France

Site Status

Institut Paoli Calmette

Marseille, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Marseille, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

University Hospital

Nantes, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Nice, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Nîmes, , France

Site Status

Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris

Paris, , France

Site Status

Hospital

Périgueux, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Point A Pitre, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Rennes, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Saint-Etienne, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Strasbourg, , France

Site Status

Hospital

Suresnes, , France

Site Status

University hospital

Toulouse, , France

Site Status

Hospital

Valenciennes, , France

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

France

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

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.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 40839096 (View on PubMed)

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.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 35523498 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2019-A00265-52

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

IMPROVE-2 study

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.