Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Aug 23;8(8):e021643.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021643.

International multicenter observational study on assessment of ventilatory management during general anaesthesia for robotic surgery and its effects on postoperative pulmonary complication (AVATaR): study protocol and statistical analysis plan

Affiliations

International multicenter observational study on assessment of ventilatory management during general anaesthesia for robotic surgery and its effects on postoperative pulmonary complication (AVATaR): study protocol and statistical analysis plan

Veronica Neves Fialho Queiroz et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has emerged as an alternative minimally invasive surgical option. Despite its growing applicability, the frequent need for pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position could significantly affect respiratory mechanics during RAS. AVATaR is an international multicenter observational study aiming to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), to characterise current practices of mechanical ventilation (MV) and to evaluate a possible association between ventilatory parameters and PPC in patients undergoing RAS.

Methods and analysis: AVATaR is an observational study of surgical patients undergoing MV for general anaesthesia for RAS. The primary outcome is the incidence of PPC during the first five postoperative days. Secondary outcomes include practice of MV, effect of surgical positioning on MV, effect of MV on clinical outcome and intraoperative complications.

Ethics and dissemination: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences.

Trial registration number: NCT02989415; Pre-results.

Keywords: general anesthesia; mechanical ventilation; postoperative pulmonary complications; robotic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow chart.

References

    1. Royston CM, Lansdown MR, Brough WA. Teaching laparoscopic surgery: the need for guidelines. BMJ 1994;308:1023–5. 10.1136/bmj.308.6935.1023 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sullivan MJ, Frost EA, Lew MW. Anesthetic care of the patient for robotic surgery. Middle East J Anaesthesiol 2008;19:967–82. - PubMed
    1. Lee JR. Anesthetic considerations for robotic surgery. Korean J Anesthesiol 2014;66:3–11. 10.4097/kjae.2014.66.1.3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Choi EM, Na S, Choi SH, et al. . Comparison of volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation in steep Trendelenburg position for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth 2011;23:183–8. 10.1016/j.jclinane.2010.08.006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sharma KC, Brandstetter RD, Brensilver JM, et al. . Cardiopulmonary physiology and pathophysiology as a consequence of laparoscopic surgery. Chest 1996;110:810–5. 10.1378/chest.110.3.810 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data