IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0130771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Acute Hypercapnia on Outcomes and Predictive Risk Factors for Complications among Patients Receiving Bronchoscopic Interventions under General Anesthesia

Author

Listed:
  • Qinghao Cheng
  • Jieli Zhang
  • Hongwu Wang
  • Rujin Zhang
  • Yun Yue
  • Lei Li

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of acute hypercapnia on surgery outcomes among patients receiving bronchoscopic interventions under general anesthesia. Furthermore, independent predictive factors for surgery complications were analyzed. Method: A total of 323 patients with airway stenosis were enrolled in this retrospective study. Each patient underwent interventional rigid bronchoscopy under general anesthesia. Arterial blood gas (ABG) was measured intraoperatively. In light of PaCO2 levels in ABG, patients were divided into three groups: Group C (control) (PaCO2:≤ 60 mmHg), Group M (moderate) (PaCO2:61–100 mmHg), and Group S (severe) (PaCO2: >100 mmHg). Parameters, including PaO2 levels and recovery delays, were compared across three groups. Complications among patients receiving bronchoscopic interventions were evaluated as well. Independent predictive factors for surgery related complications were analyzed by multivariable regression method. Results: Significant differences in weight (p=0.04), ASA IV (p=0.008), dyspnea index (p=0.003),COPD (p=0.02), dynamic airway collapse (p=0.002), severe stenosis severity (p=0.02), and stenosis locations among three groups were observed. Mild (PaCO2:~60 mmHg) to moderate (PaCO2:60–100 mmHg) hypercapnia was not associated with delayed recovery, whereas severe hypercapnia (PaCO2:>100 mmHg) was associated with delayed recovery, as well as declined PaO2 (p=0.00) and elevated blood glucose levels (p=0.00). The complications of bronchoscopic interventions included postoperative congestive heart failure (14 cases, 4.3%), tracheorrhagia (8 cases, 2.5%), delayed recovery (19 cases, 5.9%), and transfers to ICU after surgery (10 cases, 3.1%). The multivariable regression analysis showed that procedure duration (p=0.003), lobectomy (p=0.007), dynamic airway collapse (p=0.01), severe bronchial stenosis (p=0.01) and hypercapnia (p=0.02) were independent predictive factors for surgery related complications. Conclusions: Acute hypercapnia lower than 100 mmHg was not associated with detrimental consequences, whereas severe hypercapnia (PaCO2: >100 mmHg) was associated with lower levels of PaO2. Hypercapnia was an independent predictive factor for bronchoscopic intervention complication, which may help physicians to optimize the therapeutic choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinghao Cheng & Jieli Zhang & Hongwu Wang & Rujin Zhang & Yun Yue & Lei Li, 2015. "Effect of Acute Hypercapnia on Outcomes and Predictive Risk Factors for Complications among Patients Receiving Bronchoscopic Interventions under General Anesthesia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-8, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0130771
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130771
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130771
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130771&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0130771?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0130771. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.