Does patient-ventilator asynchrony really matter?

Abstract

Past observational studies have reported the association between patient-ventilator asynchronies and poor clinical outcomes, namely longer duration of mechanical ventilation and higher mortality. But causality has remained undetermined. During the era of lung and diaphragm protective ventilation, should we revolutionize our clinical practice to detect and treat dyssynchrony? Clinicians' ability to recognize asynchronies is typically low. Automatized softwares based on artificial intelligence have been trained to largely outperform human eyesight and are close to be implemented at the bedside. There is growing evidence that in susceptible patients, dyssynchrony may lead to ventilation-induced lung injury (or patient self-inflicted lung injury) and that clusters of such dyssynchronous events have the highest association with poor outcomes. Dyssynchrony may also be associated with harm indirectly when it reflects over-assistance or over-sedation. However, the occurrence of reverse triggering by means of low inspiratory efforts during passive ventilation may prevent diaphragm dysfunction and atrophy and be beneficial. Most recent evidence on the topic suggests that synchrony between the patient and the mechanical ventilator is a critical element for protecting lung and diaphragm during the time of invasive mechanical ventilation or may reflect inadequate settings or sedation. Therefore, it is a complex situation, and clinical trials are still needed to test the effectiveness of keeping patient-ventilator interaction synchronous on clinical outcomes.