Additional file 2: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 checklist: recommended items to address in a clinical trial protocol and related documents. (PDF 122 kb).

Erratum: Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial [Trials, 18, (2017)(202)] DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0

Additional file 1: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

PROBESE Study protocol version 2.5. This PDF file includes the most recent version of the PROBESE Study protocol with changes highlighted. (PDF 870Â kb)

Additional file 4: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Standard operating procedures (SOP) for plasma Sampling. (PDF 115Â kb)

Additional file 1: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

PROBESE Study protocol version 2.5. This PDF file includes the most recent version of the PROBESE Study protocol with changes highlighted. (PDF 870Â kb)

Correction to: Potentially modifiable factors contributing to outcome from acute respiratory distress syndrome: the LUNG SAFE study (Intensive Care Medicine, (2016), 42, 12, (1865-1876), 10.1007/s00134-016-4571-5)

The members of the LUNG SAFE Investigators and the ESICM Trials Group were provided in such a way that they could not be indexed as collaborators on PubMed. The publisher apologizes for this error.

Resolved versus confirmed ARDS after 24 h: insights from the LUNG SAFE study

Purpose: To evaluate patients with resolved versus confirmed ARDS, identify subgroups with substantial mortality risk, and to determine the utility of day 2 ARDS reclassification. Methods: Our primary objective, in this secondary LUNG SAFE analysis, was to compare outcome in patients with resolved versus confirmed ARDS after 24 h. Secondary objectives included identifying factors associated with ARDS persistence and mortality, and the utility of day 2 ARDS reclassification. Results: Of 2377 patients fulfilling the ARDS definition on the first day of ARDS (day 1) and receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, 503 (24%) no longer fulfilled the ARDS definition the next day, 52% of whom initial…

Additional file 3: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

PROBESE case report form version 1.2.2. This file corresponds to the paper version of the case report form. (DOC 1610 kb).

The Association of Intraoperative driving pressure with postoperative pulmonary complications in open versus closed abdominal surgery patients – a posthoc propensity score–weighted cohort analysis of the LAS VEGAS study

Abstract Background It is uncertain whether the association of the intraoperative driving pressure (ΔP) with postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) depends on the surgical approach during abdominal surgery. Our primary objective was to determine and compare the association of time–weighted average ΔP (ΔPTW) with PPCs. We also tested the association of ΔPTW with intraoperative adverse events. Methods Posthoc retrospective propensity score–weighted cohort analysis of patients undergoing open or closed abdominal surgery in the ‘Local ASsessment of Ventilatory management during General Anaesthesia for Surgery’ (LAS VEGAS) study, that included patients in 146 hospitals across 29 countries.…

Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) increase the morbidity and mortality of surgery in obese patients. High levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with lung recruitment maneuvers may improve intraoperative respiratory function, but they can also compromise hemodynamics, and the effects on PPCs are uncertain. We hypothesized that intraoperative mechanical ventilation using high PEEP with periodic recruitment maneuvers, as compared with low PEEP without recruitment maneuvers, prevents PPCs in obese patients. Methods/design The PRotective Ventilation with Higher versus Lower PEEP during General Anesthesia for Surgery in OBESE Patients (PROBESE) study is a multice…

Additional file 2: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 checklist: recommended items to address in a clinical trial protocol and related documents. (PDF 122 kb).

Additional file 5: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Standard operating procedures (SOP) for plasma Sampling. (PDF 110Â kb)

Additional file 3: of Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

PROBESE case report form version 1.2.2. This file corresponds to the paper version of the case report form. (DOC 1610 kb).