Cardiothoracic & vascular anesthesia
Individualized Flow-controlled versus Pressure-controlled Ventilation in Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors' conclusion
FCV did not reduce plasmatic IL-8 levels at the predefined timepoint 6 h after cardiopulmonary bypass.
Study context
- Population
- Adults undergoing cardiac surgery with CPBallocated 1:1
- Participants
- 140 adults
- Comparison
- Individualised flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) vs pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV)
- Primary endpoint
- Postoperative plasmatic interleukin 8 (IL-8) levels
- Follow-up
- 6 h after CPB
Methodological detailssingle-centre, Recruitment August 10, 2020, to November 16, 2022
- Single-centre
- Recruitment August 10, 2020, to November 16, 2022
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
β
0.08 pg/ml
95% CI −0.17 to 0.33
P = 0.573
By group
FCV
3.08
median
PCV
3.60
median
Secondary outcomes
Mechanical power
- FCV reduced perioperatively applied mechanical power
- 55%
Ventilation parameters
- ΔP and tidal volumes higher with FCV; lower respiratory rates and minute volumes required for normocapnia
PPCs, extrapulmonary complications and hospital LOS (explorative)
- After FCV, single PPCs (e.g. confirmed pneumonia, moderate and severe hypoxemia) and any extrapulmonary complication lower, hospital stay shorter
- Explorative secondary outcomes
Original publication
Individualized Flow-controlled versus Pressure-controlled Ventilation in Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesthesiology. Published 17 November 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →