BACKGROUND: Reliable assessment of fluid responsiveness with pulse pressure variation (PPV) depends on certain ventilation-related preconditions; however, some of these requirements are in contrast with recommendations for protective ventilation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability of PPV in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery by retrospectively analyzing intraoperative ventilation data.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Intraoperative ventilation data from three large medical centers in Germany and Switzerland from January to December 2018 were extracted from electronic patient records and pseudonymized; 10,334 complete data sets were analyzed with respect to the ventilation parameters set as well as demographic and medical data.

RESULTS: In 6.3% of the 3398 included anesthesia records, patients were ventilated with mean tidal volumes (mTV) > 8 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW). These would qualify for PPV-based hemodynamic assessment, but the majority were ventilated with lower mTVs. In patients who underwent abdominal surgery (75.5% of analyzed cases), mTVs > 8 ml/kg PBW were used in 5.5% of cases, which did not differ between laparoscopic (44.9%) and open (55.1%) approaches. Other obstacles to the use of PPV, such as elevated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or increased respiratory rate, were also identified. Of all the cases 6.0% were ventilated with a mTV of > 8 ml/kg PBW and a PEEP of 5-10 cmH2O and 0.3% were ventilated with a mTV > 8 ml/kg PBW and a PEEP of > 10 cmH2O.

CONCLUSION: The data suggest that only few patients meet the currently defined TV (of > 8 ml/kg PBW) for assessment of fluid responsiveness using PPV during surgery.