Background: Using the frequentist approach, a recent meta-analysis of three randomized clinical trials in patients undergoing intraoperative ventilation during general anesthesia for major surgery failed to show the benefit of ventilation that uses high positive end-expiratory pressure with recruitment maneuvers when compared to ventilation that uses low positive end-expiratory pressure without recruitment maneuvers. Methods: We designed a protocol for a Bayesian analysis using the pooled dataset. The multilevel Bayesian logistic model will use the individual patient data. Prior distributions will be prespecified to represent a varying level of skepticism for the effect estimate. The primary endpoint will be a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) within the first seven postoperative days, which reflects the primary endpoint of the original studies. We preset a range of practical equivalence to assess the futility of the intervention with an interval of odds ratio (OR) between 0.9 and 1.1 and assess how much of the 95% of highest density interval (HDI) falls between the region of practical equivalence. Ethics and dissemination: The used data derive from approved studies that were published in recent years. The findings of this current analysis will be reported in a new manuscript, drafted by the writing committee on behalf of the three research groups. All investigators listed in the original trials will serve as collaborative authors.
Keywords: Bayesian analysis; Mechanical ventilation; PEEP; intraoperative ventilation; postoperative pulmonary complications; recruitment maneuvers.
Copyright: © 2023 Mazzinari G et al.