Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 24, 2025
Author Spotlight: Scope of LE-ULBD as a Safe, Effective, and Minimally Invasive Approach to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Published on: February 9, 2024
A Comparative Evaluation of Unilateral and Bilateral Sequential Lung Isolation for Vertebral Body Tethering: A
B Randall Brenn1,2, Gregory M Disilvio1, Evan Yarnall3
1Anesthesiology, Shriners Children's-Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA.
Background:
Vertebral body tethering (VBT) requires a thoracoscopic approach to visualize the vertebral bodies. Lung collapse and re-expansion have the potential to cause acute lung injury, resulting in increased oxygen and ventilation requirements.
Aims:
We compared the intraoperative ventilator management, intra- and postoperative blood gas determinations, and hospital stay information between adolescents undergoing unilateral versus bilateral lung isolation for vertebral body tethering.
Methods:
A study cohort of 132 propensity-matched cases (66 unilateral and 66 bilateral) was derived from 351 consecutive VBT cases. Patient demographic information, case information, fluid administration, ventilatory settings data, blood gas parameters, and complete blood count and differential data were entered into a datasheet. Derived parameters included values calculated from the alveolar gas equation to develop an oxygen cascade and measures of inflammatory response. Chi-square was used for categorical data, and independent samples and t-tests were used for continuous data.
Results:
The double lung isolation group required higher peak inspiratory pressures (SL 29±5 vs. DL 31±5, p=0.026), resulting in higher tidal volume (SL 246±63 vs. DL 334±101, p<0.001) and tidal volume per kg (SL 5.6±1.4 vs. DL 6.9±2, p<0.001) as compared to the single lung group. The double lung group required a higher partial pressure of inspired and alveolar oxygen as well as a higher alveolar to arterial oxygen tension gradient (SL 417±126 vs. DL 485±96, p=0.001) to achieve optimal arterial oxygen tension. Patients with double lung isolation had similar intensive care lengths of stay but a longer hospital stay than single lung isolation patients.
Conclusion:
Patients undergoing double lung isolation required greater ventilatory support and had more evidence of acute lung injury, as evidenced by a higher postoperative alveolar to arterial oxygen gradient; however, these healthy adolescents tolerated the procedure well and only differed in the hospital length of stay by a day.
