You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 13, Issue 4
  • Association of preoperative spirometry tests with postoperative pulmonary complications after mediastinal mass resection: protocol for a retrospective cohort study

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Anaesthesia
Protocol
Association of preoperative spirometry tests with postoperative pulmonary complications after mediastinal mass resection: protocol for a retrospective cohort study
  1. Zhiyuan Zhang,
  2. Yu Fu,
  3. Nan Zhang,
  4. Jing Yu,
  5. Zongmei Wen
  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
  1. Correspondence to Dr Zongmei Wen; wzm1103{at}126.com

Abstract

Introduction Patients with a mediastinal mass are at risk of pulmonary complications in the perioperative period. Preoperative spirometry tests are recommended in patients scheduled for thoracic surgery. Our objective is to investigate the association between preoperative spirometry results and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients following mediastinal mass resection, which may determine the usefulness of spirometry tests in the prediction of the perioperative respiratory risk.

Methods and analysis This protocol describes a retrospective cohort study of patients with mediastinal masses in Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital between 1 September 2021 and 1 September 2022, with a planned sample size of 660 patients. The primary aim of this study is to explore the association between preoperative spirometry results and the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications after mediastinal mass resection. Logistic regression analysis will be used to calculate the adjusted incidence rate difference and incidence rate ratios (with 95% CIs).

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee of Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital (K21-372Y). The results of the study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed biomedical journal for publication and presented at relevant conferences.

  • adult anaesthesia
  • thoracic surgery
  • thoracic medicine
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069956

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

    • This is one of the few studies that has evaluated the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients with mediastinal masses based on preoperative spirometry tests.

    • The study adopts a retrospective cohort study design in a high-volume thoracic centre in China.

    • Multivariate logistic regression following univariate analysis will be used.

    • This is a single-centre study with unknown generalisability, and validation of the findings will be necessary.

    • Residual, unidentified confounding cannot be fully excluded due to the retrospective design of the study.

    Introduction

    Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) contribute to prolonged length of stay, increased costs of care and higher operative mortality, which are the leading causes of death after thoracic surgery.1 2 Pulmonary complications after lung resection have already been established and are well described.3 4 However, PPCs after mediastinal mass resection in thoracic surgery remain a separate problem, which is rarely an area of concern in the literature.

    Masses of the mediastinum comprise a wide diversity of tumours afflicting patients of all ages.5 6 Mediastinal masses represent different disease states, from asymptomatic lesions to severe life-threatening presentations.7 8 For decades, surgical resection has been the preferred therapeutic approach for mediastinal masses.9 Over recent years, great advancements in thoracic surgery, especially the application and popularisation of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS), have largely broadened the optional surgical approaches for mediastinal tumour resection. Compared with extensive surgery (thoracotomies and medial sternotomies), these minimally invasive approaches have the superiorities of less trauma, enhanced recovery and fewer perioperative complications.9–12 However, insufficient studies explore the prevalence of PPCs after mediastinal mass resection and the risk factors for its occurrence.

    The tumour-caused changes in the mediastinum lead to large variability in the respiratory and haemodynamic responses to anaesthesia in patients with mediastinal mass, and even a life-threatening situation may occur due to the deficiency in the preoperative diagnosis, preparation and anaesthetic technique.8 13 14 Therefore, exploring predictors of general anaesthesia risk for patients with a mediastinal tumour is critical and necessary. Accurate assessment of pulmonary function has been claimed to improve risk assessment of pulmonary complications.15 16 Accordingly, preoperative pulmonary function tests (PFTs) are recommended in patients scheduled for lung resection,17 cardiac18 or non-thoracic surgery,19 where spirometry, a specialised non-invasive test to measure lung function, may contribute to identifying patients at high risk of PPCs.20 Especially, the prognostic value of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and the ratio of FEV1 to forced vital capacity (FVC) have been rationally well established in aortocoronary bypass surgery and lung resection, with a reduced FEV1 and FEV1/FVC strongly associated with postoperative mortality and complications.21 22 However, the predictive capability of spirometry for complications after mediastinal mass resection surgery is unclear and has not been described in scientific literature.

    Primary objective

    The primary objective of this study is to investigate the association between preoperative spirometry results and the incidence of PPCs in patients following mediastinal mass resection.

    Secondary objective

    The secondary objectives are to evaluate the prevalence of PPCs after mediastinal mass resection surgery at our centre and to determine whether preoperative spirometry is related to 30-day readmission and mortality.

    Methods and analysis

    Study setting

    This study will be a retrospective cohort study and will be conducted at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, one of the largest thoracic centres in China. The study was approved by the institutional review board of Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital (K21-372Y). The need for obtaining informed patient consent will be waived due to the retrospective nature of this study. We will adhere to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist for reporting observational studies. All methods will be performed in accordance with the ethical principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. We will use the STROBE checklist and guidance when reporting our study findings.23

    Eligibility criteria

    Patients in receipt of mediastinal mass resection surgery at our centre between 1 September 2021 and 1 September 2022 and fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be included in the study (table 1). To be enrolled, only those who underwent preoperative PFTs will be included in the analysis, and the integrity of the data will be reviewed. A study flow diagram is provided in figure 1.

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Inclusion and exclusion criteria

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Study flow diagram. RATS, robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; VATS, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

    Data collection

    Study data will be collected from electronic medical records at our institution from patients who had a mediastinal mass resection under VATS or RATS between 1 September 2021 and 1 September 2022. Metastasectomy cases and those surgery using median sternotomy will be excluded. The following information will be collected from electronic medical records:

    Preoperative data

    Preoperative data that will be collected are listed in table 2.

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Preoperative data

    Intraoperative data

    Intraoperative data will include the duration of surgery, blood loss, requirement for transfusion, whether hypoxaemia and hypotension occur, new-onset atrial fibrillation, utilisation of hydroxyethyl starch and vasopressors during operation.

    Postoperative data

    Postoperative data will be collected from the institutional thoracic surgery registry and include PPCs, new-onset arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, renal complication, cerebral infarction, seizure, pulmonary thromboembolism, surgical complications, the length of stay, 30-day and 90-day readmission, and 30-day mortality. The levels of a myocardial enzyme (cardiac troponin T, creatine kinase MB isoenzyme, myoglobin and brain natriuretic peptide) and inflammatory factors (interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6 and tumour necrosis factor-α) in peripheral blood will also be recorded. The renal complication was defined as an Acute Kidney Injury Network classification ≥2. Surgical complications will include prolonged air leak (≥5 days), prolonged effusion (≥5 days), chylothorax, vocal cord palsy, empyema, wound infection, wound dehiscence and bronchopleural fistula.

    Institutional protocol for perioperative care

    Patients received standard perioperative care according to our institutional protocol. All patients received general anaesthesia, which was performed using standard doses of midazolam, propofol, sufentanil and rocuronium bromide. Double-lumen tracheal intubation was performed when the patient lost consciousness. The anaesthetic, fluid volume, infusion speed and transfusion were adjusted according to haemodynamic monitoring conditions to maintain the haemodynamic parameters within 20% of the preoperative baseline values. A protective ventilation protocol was implemented for all patients. All patients were routinely extubated at the end of surgery unless the attending anaesthesiologists or surgeons decided not to. For postoperative pain management, we have implemented a protocol specific to each type of patient, mainly relying on patient-controlled intravenous analgesia and giving light intravenous or oral rescue analgesics. All patients underwent routine X-ray examinations on the first day after the operation.

    Preoperative spirometry tests

    All patients accepted preoperative spirometry tests within 1 week before the operation, which are routine preoperative tests among patients undergoing mediastinal mass resection through VATS or RATS at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital. Preoperative spirometry results include FVC, FEV1, %VC (FVC/predicted VC) and FEV1/FVC (FEV1%). FVC is defined as the maximal volume of air exhaled with a maximally forced effort from a maximal inspiration, which is the vital capacity performed with a maximally forced expiratory effort. FEV1 is defined as the volume (L) of air exhaled in the first second of forced expiration, starting from a position of full inspiration. Both FEV1 and FVC are presented as percentage-predicted values based on age, gender and height reference standards used by our institution, and the ratio of FEV1/FVC is also presented as a percentage. A specialised technician from the Department of Pulmonology in the same centre will be appointed to perform the spirometry tests for every patient 1 week before surgery.

    Main exposures

    According to the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society guidelines,24 the cut-off point for FVC is 80% predicted, and that for FEV1% is 70%. Spirometry assessment is determined by %FVC and FEV1%, and subjects are divided into four categories (normal, obstructive, restrictive and combined), depending on whether %FVC and FEV1% are normal or abnormal. Consequently, we will create a normal cohort and a ventilatory dysfunction cohort (including obstructive, restrictive and combined) (table 3).

    View this table:
    Table 3

    Study cohorts

    Postoperative pulmonary complications

    The PPCs will be assessed via symptoms and the chest X-ray on the first day after surgery. Bedside X-ray examinations are available for every patient to diagnose atelectasis and determine the location of the chest tube, which could assess PPCs. In this study, the PPCs will be defined as the composite of respiratory complications with common pathophysiological mechanisms covering pulmonary collapse and airway contamination,25 which include (1) atelectasis detected on postoperative chest radiograph, (2) pulmonary aspiration recognised by clear clinical history and radiological evidence, (3) pneumonia using US Centers for Disease Control criteria,26 and (4) acute respiratory distress syndrome covering Berlin consensus definition27 and reinstitution of mechanical or non-invasive ventilation after extubation28 (table 4). In addition, other complications associated with the physiological changes that follow surgery and anaesthesia, including (1) pulmonary embolism, (2) pleural effusion, (3) cardiogenic pulmonary oedema, (4) pneumothorax and (5) bronchospasm, were excluded. Any PPCs defined in table 4 during the hospital will be recorded. Even if the patient does not report symptoms, bedside X-ray examination can help rule out PPCs. The thoracic surgeon decides whether to carry out further CT examination, if necessary, and all the results are available in the electronic medical record.

    View this table:
    Table 4

    Definitions of postoperative respiratory complications according to the European Perioperative Clinical Outcome consensus statement

    Furthermore, the definition of PPCs we used incorporates an assessment of severity25:

    1. None: planned use of supplemental oxygen or mechanical respiratory support as part of routine care, but not in response to a complication or deteriorating physiology. Therapies that are purely preventive or prophylactic, for example, high-flow nasal oxygen or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) should be recorded as none.

    2. Mild: therapeutic supplemental oxygen ≤0.6 fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2).

    3. Moderate: therapeutic supplemental oxygen ≥0.6 FiO2, requirement for high-flow nasal oxygen or both.

    4. Severe: unplanned non-invasive mechanical ventilation, CPAP or invasive mechanical ventilation requiring tracheal intubation.

    Sample size

    To our knowledge, there have been no studies examining rates of PPCs for patients after mediastinal mass resection precisely as we have defined them here. It has been reported that the incidence of PPCs is about 10.5% in adults with mediastinal mass.29 Based on our pilot study, the incidence of PPCs is about 30% in an abnormal cohort of spirometry tests. Assuming 80% power to detect a proportion of 0.105 in the normal cohort and 0.3 in the abnormal cohort with a one-sided α of 0.05, this would require 300 patients per group, with an overall sample of n=600. We aim to include 660 patients to allow a loss to follow-up rate of 10%. During the 1-year observational window, there should be approximately 700 patients undergoing mediastinal mass resection surgery in our centre, a high-volume thoracic centre in China.

    Statistical analysis

    Descriptive statistics were used to characterise the cohort. Categorical variables were described using counts and frequencies, and continuous variables were described using means with SDs and medians with IQRs. Significant differences between the two cohorts were tested by χ2 or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and Student’s t-test for continuous variables. Skewed distributed data will be compared using a non-parametric test.

    Logistic regression analysis will be used to calculate the adjusted incidence rate difference and incidence rate ratios (with 95% CIs). Univariate analysis for odds of any PPCs will be performed by logistic regression for every confounder from our database. Furthermore, a multivariable model will be built considering significant (p<0.05) variables from the univariate regression combined with partial preoperative and intraoperative variables in the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia Score30 (age, preoperative SpO2, preoperative anaemia and duration of surgery).

    Two-tailed p values of less than 0.05 will be considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses will be performed using SPSS V.26.0 (IBM SPSS).

    Data management and monitoring

    All data will be analysed through ResMan (www.medresman.org.cn/), an online website for data management, in linked, anonymised form. The conduct of the trial conduction will be supervised by the study supervisor (ZW), with monthly audits of the trial performed. The datasets will be available from the chief investigator upon reasonable request.

    Study status

    Our data collection is ongoing and it is expected to be completed in July 2023. Data analysis is due to begin in August 2023 and we plan to complete the study by the end of 2023.

    Patient and public involvement

    None.

    Ethics and dissemination

    The study was approved by the ethics committee of Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital (K21-372Y). On completion, the results of the study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed biomedical journal for publication and presented at relevant conferences.

    Discussion

    PPCs encompass a series of respiratory diseases, ranging from asymptomatic atelectasis to respiratory failure,1 31 which are challenging to perioperative management for patients undergoing major surgery and relevant to prolonged hospital stays and elevated mortality.32 The incidence of PPCs is multifactorial, varied considerably, and is usually dependent on surgical factors and individual characteristics. Besides, increased age, extensive surgical range and thoracic surgery are strongly associated with a higher risk of PPCs.32 The pain disrupting the performance of respiratory muscles and the anaesthesia, to a lesser extent, adversely affecting lung function are also the causes of PPCs. Advances in perioperative care ensure the diversity of effective interventions covering preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative periods to minimise the adverse effects of surgery and anaesthesia. However, the prediction and treatment of PPCs are multidisciplinary challenges, with infrequent or outdated consensus guidelines aimed to reduce the risk of PPCs compared with those for postoperative cardiovascular complications.33 34

    Accurate assessment of lung function has been regarded as vital for patients presenting for thoracic surgery, which usually have lung or bronchial carcinoma, a mediastinal mass or oesophageal disease. Most of these patients are elderly, with a history of smoking and consequent comorbid conditions. Moreover, unique features of thoracic surgery including the special cardiopulmonary physiology caused by position, ventilation/perfusion mismatch, one lung ventilation and hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction lead to a large challenge for thoracic anaesthesia and perioperative management.15 All these factors together contribute to the necessity of PFTs. Spirometry is the gold-standard method for the detection of airflow limitations and is recommended in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).35 However, surgery is increasingly being carried out in patients with undiagnosed COPD, which is a major risk factor for PPCs.36 Anaesthesia and surgery may aggravate pre-existing airway obstructions due to the influence on the respiratory system. FEV1, which predicts the degree of respiratory impairment in patients with COPD, is a critical tool to evaluate a patient for thoracic surgery with preoperative FEV1 less than 60% predicted strongly indicating PPCs and 30-day mortality.37 The value of spirometry in predicting PPCs after lung resection has been demonstrated by several retrospective studies.19 38–40 However, the association between spirometry and perioperative respiratory complications in adults with mediastinal mass remains unclear.

    One retrospective study evaluated the incidence of life-threatening perioperative respiratory complications in adult patients with mediastinal mass and studied the usefulness of PFTs in the determination of the perioperative risk.41 A combination of obstructive and restrictive patterns was associated with a high rate of postoperative respiratory complications. However, the patients all had extensive surgery (thoracotomies and medial sternotomies). Currently, minimally invasive surgery has replaced median sternotomy for mediastinal masses and is performed by various approaches. Thus, the primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the association between preoperative spirometry tests and PPCs to provide targets for PPC prediction in patients scheduled for mediastinal mass resection surgery.

    This study has several limitations. First, as clinical data were collected from electronic medical records, partially significant data will be lost and some patients will be excluded. However, the high-volume thoracic surgery centre ensures sufficient samples and credibility, which cover this deficiency to some extent. Although the retrospective cohort design will increase case numbers and statistical power, it may lead to selection and information bias. In addition, the study results will have unknown generalisability, in view of the single-centre setting, and may not be applicable outside of China. Nevertheless, our results can provide a clinical reference for other centres to predict PPC after mediastinal mass resection.

    Ethics statements

    Patient consent for publication

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Miskovic A,
      2. Lumb AB
      . Postoperative pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth 2017;118:317–34. doi:10.1093/bja/aex002
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    2. ↵
      1. Lohser J,
      2. Slinger P
      . Lung injury after one-lung ventilation: a review of the pathophysiologic mechanisms affecting the ventilated and the collapsed lung. Anesth Analg 2015;121:302–18. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000000808
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    3. ↵
      1. Shelley BG,
      2. McCall PJ,
      3. Glass A, et al
      . Association between anaesthetic technique and unplanned admission to intensive care after thoracic lung resection surgery: the second association of cardiothoracic anaesthesia and critical care (ACTACC) national audit. Anaesthesia 2019;74:1121–9. doi:10.1111/anae.14649
      OpenUrlPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Baar W,
      2. Semmelmann A,
      3. Knoerlein J, et al
      . Risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications leading to increased in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing thoracotomy for primary lung cancer resection: a multicentre retrospective cohort study of the German thorax registry. J Clin Med 2022;11:5774. doi:10.3390/jcm11195774
    5. ↵
      1. Marx A,
      2. Chan JKC,
      3. Chalabreysse L, et al
      . The 2021 who classification of tumors of the thymus and mediastinum: what is new in thymic epithelial, germ cell, and mesenchymal tumors? J Thorac Oncol 2022;17:200–13. doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2021.10.010
      OpenUrl
    6. ↵
      1. Aroor AR
      . A study of clinical characteristics of mediastinal mass. JCDR 2014;8:77–80. doi:10.7860/JCDR/2014/7622.4013
      OpenUrl
    7. ↵
      1. Carter BW,
      2. Lichtenberger JP
      . Imaging of the posterior/paravertebral mediastinum. Radiol Clin North Am 2021;59:243–9. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2020.11.010
      OpenUrl
    8. ↵
      1. Hartigan PM,
      2. Karamnov S,
      3. Gill RR, et al
      . Mediastinal masses, anesthetic interventions, and airway compression in adults: a prospective observational study. Anesthesiology 2022;136:104–14. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000004011
      OpenUrl
    9. ↵
      1. Radkani P,
      2. Joshi D,
      3. Barot T, et al
      . Robotic video-assisted thoracoscopy: minimally invasive approach for management of mediastinal tumors. J Robot Surg 2018;12:75–9. doi:10.1007/s11701-017-0692-2
      OpenUrl
    10. ↵
      1. Melfi FMA,
      2. Fanucchi O,
      3. Mussi A
      . Minimally invasive mediastinal surgery. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 2016;5:10–7. doi:10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2015.12.03
      OpenUrl
    11. ↵
      1. Seong YW,
      2. Kang CH,
      3. Choi J-W, et al
      . Early clinical outcomes of robot-assisted surgery for anterior mediastinal mass: its superiority over a conventional sternotomy approach evaluated by propensity score matching†. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014;45:e68–73. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezt557
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. Cao M,
      2. Wang Q,
      3. Yin H, et al
      . Short-Term analysis of uniport video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery via the subxiphoid approach without chest tube drainage for anterior mediastinal tumors: a comparative retrospective study. Ann Transl Med 2021;9:1687. doi:10.21037/atm-21-5790
    13. ↵
      1. Erdös G,
      2. Tzanova I
      . Perioperative anaesthetic management of mediastinal mass in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2009;26:627–32. doi:10.1097/EJA.0b013e328324b7f8
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Blank RS,
      2. de Souza DG
      . Anesthetic management of patients with an anterior mediastinal mass: continuing professional development. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth 2011;58:853–67. doi:10.1007/s12630-011-9539-x
      OpenUrl
    15. ↵
      1. Matheos T,
      2. Ram L,
      3. Canelli R
      . Preoperative evaluation for thoracic surgery. Thorac Surg Clin 2020;30:241–7. doi:10.1016/j.thorsurg.2020.04.003
      OpenUrl
    16. ↵
      1. Kearney DJ,
      2. Lee TH,
      3. Reilly JJ, et al
      . Assessment of operative risk in patients undergoing lung resection. Importance of predicted pulmonary function. Chest 1994;105:753–9. doi:10.1378/chest.105.3.753
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    17. ↵
      1. Brunelli A,
      2. Kim AW,
      3. Berger KI, et al
      . Physiologic evaluation of the patient with lung cancer being considered for resectional surgery. Chest 2013;143:e166S–e190S. doi:10.1378/chest.12-2395
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    18. ↵
      1. Sankar A,
      2. Thorpe KE,
      3. Gershon AS, et al
      . Association of preoperative spirometry with cardiopulmonary fitness and postoperative outcomes in surgical patients: a multicentre prospective cohort study. EClinicalMedicine 2020;23:100396. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100396
    19. ↵
      1. Dankert A,
      2. Dohrmann T,
      3. Löser B, et al
      . Pulmonary function tests for the prediction of postoperative pulmonary complications. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2022;119:99–106. doi:10.3238/arztebl.m2022.0074
      OpenUrl
    20. ↵
      1. Pellegrino R,
      2. Viegi G,
      3. Brusasco V, et al
      . Interpretative strategies for lung function tests. Eur Respir J 2005;26:948–68. doi:10.1183/09031936.05.00035205
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    21. ↵
      1. Kallianos A,
      2. Rapti A,
      3. Tsimpoukis S, et al
      . Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (cpet) as preoperative test before lung resection. In Vivo 2014;28:1013–20.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    22. ↵
      1. Saleh HZ,
      2. Mohan K,
      3. Shaw M, et al
      . Impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity on surgical outcomes in patients undergoing non-emergent coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012;42:108–13. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezr271
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    23. ↵
      1. von Elm E,
      2. Altman DG,
      3. Egger M, et al
      . The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007;370:1453–7. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. ↵
      1. Miller MR,
      2. Hankinson J,
      3. Brusasco V, et al
      . Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005;26:319–38. doi:10.1183/09031936.05.00034805
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    25. ↵
      1. Abbott TEF,
      2. Fowler AJ,
      3. Pelosi P, et al
      . A systematic review and consensus definitions for standardised end-points in perioperative medicine: pulmonary complications. Br J Anaesth 2018;120:1066–79. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.007
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    26. ↵
      1. Jammer I,
      2. Wickboldt N,
      3. Sander M, et al
      . Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European perioperative clinical outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint Taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2015;32:88–105. doi:10.1097/EJA.0000000000000118
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    27. ↵
      1. Ranieri VM,
      2. Rubenfeld GD,
      3. Thompson BT, et al
      . Acute respiratory distress syndrome: the berlin definition. JAMA 2012;307:2526–33. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.5669
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    28. ↵
      1. Fernández-Pérez ER,
      2. Sprung J,
      3. Afessa B, et al
      . Intraoperative ventilator settings and acute lung injury after elective surgery: a nested case control study. Thorax 2009;64:121–7. doi:10.1136/thx.2008.102228
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    29. ↵
      1. Béchard P,
      2. Létourneau L,
      3. Lacasse Y, et al
      . Perioperative cardiorespiratory complications in adults with mediastinal mass: incidence and risk factors. Anesthesiology 2004;100:826–34. doi:10.1097/00000542-200404000-00012
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    30. ↵
      1. Canet J,
      2. Gallart L,
      3. Gomar C, et al
      . Prediction of postoperative pulmonary complications in a population-based surgical cohort. Anesthesiology 2010;113:1338–50. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181fc6e0a
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    31. ↵
      1. Suleiman A,
      2. Costa E,
      3. Santer P, et al
      . Association between intraoperative tidal volume and postoperative respiratory complications is dependent on respiratory elastance: a retrospective, multicentre cohort study. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2022;129:263–72. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2022.05.005
      OpenUrl
    32. ↵
      1. Odor PM,
      2. Bampoe S,
      3. Gilhooly D, et al
      . Perioperative interventions for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2020;368:m540. doi:10.1136/bmj.m540
    33. ↵
      1. Lawrence VA,
      2. Cornell JE,
      3. Smetana GW, et al
      . Strategies to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications after noncardiothoracic surgery: systematic review for the American College of physicians. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:596–608. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-8-200604180-00011
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    34. ↵
      1. Fleisher LA,
      2. Fleischmann KE,
      3. Auerbach AD, et al
      . 2014 ACC/AHA guideline on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: executive summary: a report of the american college of cardiology/american heart association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation 2014;130:2215–45. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000105
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    35. ↵
      1. Vogelmeier CF,
      2. Criner GJ,
      3. Martinez FJ, et al
      . Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive lung disease 2017 report. gold executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017;195:557–82. doi:10.1164/rccm.201701-0218PP
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    36. ↵
      1. Gupta H,
      2. Ramanan B,
      3. Gupta PK, et al
      . Impact of COPD on postoperative outcomes: results from a national database. Chest 2013;143:1599–606. doi:10.1378/chest.12-1499
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    37. ↵
      1. Silvestri GA,
      2. Gonzalez AV,
      3. Jantz MA, et al
      . Methods for staging non-small cell lung cancer: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ED: American College of chest physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013;143:e211S–e250S. doi:10.1378/chest.12-2355
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    38. ↵
      1. Choi JW,
      2. Jeong H,
      3. Ahn HJ, et al
      . The impact of pulmonary function tests on early postoperative complications in open lung resection surgery: an observational cohort study. Sci Rep 2022;12. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-05279-8
    39. ↵
      1. Khullar OV,
      2. Wei JW,
      3. Wagh K, et al
      . Preoperative lung function is associated with patient-reported outcomes after lung cancer surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2021;112:415–22. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.09.016
      OpenUrl
    40. ↵
      1. Ko H-K,
      2. Liu C-Y,
      3. Ho L-I, et al
      . Predictors of delayed extubation following lung resection: focusing on preoperative pulmonary function and incentive spirometry. J Chin Med Assoc 2021;84:368–74. doi:10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000509
      OpenUrl
    41. ↵
      1. Béchard P,
      2. Létourneau L,
      3. Lacasse Y, et al
      . Perioperative cardiorespiratory complications in adults with mediastinal mass: incidence and risk factors. Anesthesiology 2004;100:826–34; doi:10.1097/00000542-200404000-00012
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Footnotes

    • Contributors ZZ and YF contributed equally to conceiving this project, facilitating protocol and drafting this manuscript. Conceptualisation—ZZ, YF and NZ. Funding acquisition—ZW. Investigation and resources—ZZ, YF and JY. Project administration, validation, visualisation, writing of the original draft, review and editing—ZZ. Supervision—ZW.

    • Funding This work is supported by grants from the following: National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 82170107), Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (202140406), Excellent Subject Leader Program of Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (2022XD007), and Development Fund of Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine 2022.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.