Background: General anesthesia usually requires mechanical ventilation, which is traditionally accomplished with constant tidal volumes in volume- or pressure-controlled modes. Experimental studies suggest that the use of variable tidal volumes (variable ventilation) recruits lung tissue, improves pulmonary function and reduces systemic inflammatory response. However, it is currently not known whether patients undergoing open abdominal surgery might benefit from intraoperative variable ventilation. Methods/Design: The PROtective VARiable ventilation trial ('PROVAR') is a single center, randomized controlled trial enrolling 50 patients who are planning for open abdominal surgery expected to last longer than 3 hours. PROVAR compares conventional (non-variable) lung protective ventilation (CV) with variable lung protective ventilation (VV) regarding pulmonary function and inflammatory response. The primary endpoint of the study is the forced vital capacity on the first postoperative day. Secondary endpoints include further lung function tests, plasma cytokine levels, spatial distribution of ventilation assessed by means of electrical impedance tomography and postoperative pulmonary complications. Discussion: We hypothesize that VV improves lung function and reduces systemic inflammatory response compared to CV in patients receiving mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia for open abdominal surgery longer than 3 hours. PROVAR is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at intra- and postoperative effects of VV on lung function. This study may help to define the role of VV during general anesthesia requiring mechanical ventilation.

Background: General anesthesia usually requires mechanical ventilation, which is traditionally accomplished with constant tidal volumes in volume- or pressure-controlled modes. Experimental studies suggest that the use of variable tidal volumes (variable ventilation) recruits lung tissue, improves pulmonary function and reduces systemic inflammatory response. However, it is currently not known whether patients undergoing open abdominal surgery might benefit from intraoperative variable ventilation. Methods/Design: The PROtective VARiable ventilation trial ('PROVAR') is a single center, randomized controlled trial enrolling 50 patients who are planning for open abdominal surgery expected to last longer than 3 hours. PROVAR compares conventional (non-variable) lung protective ventilation (CV) with variable lung protective ventilation (VV) regarding pulmonary function and inflammatory response. The primary endpoint of the study is the forced vital capacity on the first postoperative day. Secondary endpoints include further lung function tests, plasma cytokine levels, spatial distribution of ventilation assessed by means of electrical impedance tomography and postoperative pulmonary complications. Discussion: We hypothesize that VV improves lung function and reduces systemic inflammatory response compared to CV in patients receiving mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia for open abdominal surgery longer than 3 hours. PROVAR is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at intra- and postoperative effects of VV on lung function. This study may help to define the role of VV during general anesthesia requiring mechanical ventilation.

In experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), random variation of tidal volumes (VT ) during volume controlled ventilation improves gas exchange and respiratory system mechanics (so-called stochastic resonance hypothesis). It is unknown whether those positive effects may be further enhanced by periodic VT fluctuation at distinct frequencies, also known as deterministic frequency resonance.We hypothesized that the positive effects of variable ventilation on lung functionmay be further amplified by periodic VT fluctuation at specific frequencies. In anesthetized and mechanically ventilated pigs, severe ARDS was induced by saline lung lavage and injurious VT (double-hit model). Animals were then randomly assigned to 6 h of protective ventilation with one of four VT patterns: (1) random variation of VT (WN); (2) P04, main VT frequency of 0.13Hz; (3) P10, main VT frequency of 0.05Hz; (4) VCV, conventional non-variable volume controlled ventilation. In groups with variable VT , the coefficient of variation was identical (30%). We assessed lung mechanics and gas exchange, and determined lung histology and inflammation. Compared to VCV, WN, P04, and P10 resulted in lower respiratory system elastance (63 ± 13 cm H2O/L vs. 50 ± 14 cm H2O/L, 48.4 ± 21 cm H2O/L, and 45.1 ± 5.9 cm H2O/L respectively, P < 0.05 all), but only P10 improved PaO2/FIO2 after 6 h of ventilation (318 ± 96 vs. 445 ± 110mm Hg, P < 0.05). Cycle-by-cycle analysis of lung mechanics suggested intertidal recruitment/de-recruitment in P10. Lung histologic damage and inflammation did not differ among groups. In this experimental model of severe ARDS, periodic VT fluctuation at a frequency of 0.05Hz improved oxygenation during variable ventilation, suggesting that deterministic resonance adds further benefit to variable ventilation.