The association between intraoperative low driving pressure ventilation and perioperative healthcare-associated costs: A retrospective multicenter cohort study.

A low dynamic driving pressure during mechanical ventilation for general anesthesia has been associated with a lower risk of postoperative respiratory complications (PRC), a key driver of healthcare costs. It is, however, unclear whether maintaining low driving pressure is clinically relevant to measure and contain costs. We hypothesized that a lower dynamic driving pressure is associated with lower costs. Multicenter retrospective cohort study. Two academic healthcare networks in New York and Massachusetts, USA. 46,715 adult surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia for non-ambulatory (inpatient and same-day admission) surgery between 2016 and 2021. The primary exposure was the median intraoperative dynamic driving pressure. The primary outcome was direct perioperative healthcare-associated costs, which were matched with data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) to report absolute differences in total costs in United States Dollars (US$). We assessed effect modification by patients' baseline risk of PRC (score for prediction of postoperative respiratory complications [SPORC] ≥ 7) and effect mediation by rates of PRC (including post-extubation saturation < 90%, re-intubation or non-invasive ventilation within 7 days) and other major complications. The median intraoperative dynamic driving pressure was 17.2cmH Intraoperative mechanical ventilation targeting low dynamic driving pressures could be a relevant measure to reduce perioperative healthcare-associated costs in high-risk patients.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest Daniel Talmor received speaking fees and grant funds from Hamilton Medical, Inc. and Mindray Medical, outside the submitted work. Matthias Eikermann received grants from Merck & Co and serves as an Associate Editor for the British Journal of Anaesthesia. Maximilian S. Schaefer received funding for investigator-initiated studies from Merck & Co., which do not pertain to this manuscript. He is an associate editor for BMC Anesthesiology. He received honoraria for lectures from Fisher & Paykel Healthcare and Mindray Medical International Limited. He received an unrestricted philanthropic grant from Dr. Jeffrey and Judith Buzen. All other authors have no support from any organization for the submitted work, no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. This work was supported by an unrestricted grant from Dr. Jeffrey and Judith Buzen to Maximilian S. Schaefer. Dr. Jeffrey and Judith Buzen had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.