Chest
Volume 89, Issue 6, June 1986, Pages 774-781
Journal home page for Chest

Clinical Investigations
Effects of Periodic Positive Airway Pressure by Mask on Postoperative Pulmonary Function

https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.89.6.774Get rights and content

Postoperative pulmonary complications, alveolar-arteriolar oxygen difference ([A-a]O2-diff), peak expiratory flow (PEF) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were compared in patients using continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and positive expiratory pressure (PEP) administered by face mask against those of a control group using a deep-breathing device (Triflo). Forty-three consecutive, randomized patients undergoing elective upper abdominal surgery were included. CPAP, PEP and Triflo were administered for 30 consecutive breaths in every waking hour for three days postoperatively. The (A-a)O2-difference increased equally and significantly in the three groups after surgery, reaching a maximum on the first postoperative day. After this day, however, (A-a)O2-diff decreased in the CPAP and PEP groups, being significantly lower in the PEP group compared to the control group, two days postoperatively (p<0.05) and significantly lower in both the PEP and CPAP groups three days postoperatively (p<0.001 and p<0.05, respectively.) PEF did not differ significantly between the groups before or after surgery, while FVC was significantly higher in the PEP and CPAP groups, compared to control, on the third postoperative day (p<0.05). Atelectatic consolidation was observed in six of 15 patients in the control group three days postoperatively, the incidence being significantly lower in both the PEP group (0 of 15, p<0.001) and the CPAP group (one of 13, p<0.05). We concluded that periodic face mask administration of CPAP and PEP are superior to deep breathing exercises with respect to gas exchange, preservation of lung volumes and development of atelectasis after upper abdominal surgery. We also conclude that the simple and commercially available PEP mask is as effective as the more complicated CPAP system.

Section snippets

Materials and Methods

Fifty consecutive patients admitted for elective upper abdominal surgery participated in this study. The protocol was approved by the Ethical Committee for Human Studies of the University of Gothenburg and all patients gave their consent. Preoperatively, forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak expiratory flow (PEF) were determined using a wedge spirometer and a peak flow meter. In order to match the groups, patients were stratified according to pulmonary function, age (more or less than 60 yrs),

Results

Seven of the 50 consecutive patients entering the study were excluded. One patient in the control group and three in the CPAP group were excluded because of pulmonary congestion. In the PEP group, one patient was excluded due to pulmonary edema and another due to severe postoperative headache resulting from puncture of the dura mater while inserting the epidural catheter. The third patient discontinued because of severe nausea and postoperative gastric tube irritation.

The characteristics of the

Discussion

Controversy in the literature concerning beneficial prophylactic effects of mechanical devices on postoperative pulmonary function is probably due to the heterogeneous nature of the studied treatment groups and the tremendous variation in how treatment is delivered to patients. It is well known that the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications varies considerably depending on the types of surgery and abdominal incision.22-28 Despite this, treatment groups consist of patients subjected

References (0)

Cited by (117)

  • Non-invasive mechanical ventilation in postoperative patients: A clinical review

    2015, Revista Espanola de Anestesiologia y Reanimacion
  • Positive expiratory pressure - Common clinical applications and physiological effects

    2015, Respiratory Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    Instructions to the patient how to perform the technique vary and include tidal volume breaths [22], somewhat larger than normal [12,18], or deep breaths [23,24], followed by slightly activated expirations towards the resistance [12,18,23]. Patients are coached to reach and maintain a mid-expiratory pressure of 10–20 cm H2O but not to use force at the end of the expiration [12,22,23] (Fig. 1). The duration and number of treatment sessions are individualized, depending on the indications for the treatment and the severity of symptoms, but are series of breaths e.g. 10 in a row repeated once or more or for a specific duration of time [12,23,25].

  • Assessment of the acute effects of different PEP levels on respiratory pattern and operational volumes in patients with Parkinson's disease

    2014, Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Different types of respiratory therapies have been developed recently, with the aim of decreasing or minimizing possible complications caused by lung restriction. The application of Positive expiratory Pressure (PEP) represents a reliable, safe and low-cost intervention that allows increasing lung volumes and intrathoracic pressure (Ricksten et al., 1986; Myers, 2007). Although positive pressure therapy has been used in other respiratory and cardiac diseases (Mortensen et al., 1991; Placidi et al., 2006), the possible physiologic effects that different intensities of PEP may cause in chest volumes in Parkinson's patients remains unknown.

View all citing articles on Scopus

Presented at the 18th Congress of the Scandinavian Society of Anesthesiologists, Reykjavik, Iceland, June 25-29, 1985.

Manuscript received September 12; revision accepted December 18.

View full text