Abstract

Background and aimsTo investigate whether performing alveolar recruitment or adding inspiratory pauses could promote physiologic benefits (VT) during moderately-high-frequency positive pressure ventilation (MHFPPV) delivered by a conventional ventilator in a porcine model of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsProspective experimental laboratory study with eight pigs. Induction of acute lung injury with sequential pulmonary lavages and injurious ventilation was initially performed. Then, animals were ventilated on a conventional mechanical ventilator with a respiratory rate (RR) = 60 breaths/minute and PEEP titrated according to ARDS Network table. The first two steps consisted of a randomized order of inspiratory pauses of 10 and 30% of inspiratory time. In final step, we removed the inspiratory pause and titrated PEEP, after lung recruitment, with the aid of electrical impedance tomography. At each step, PaCO2 was allowed to stabilize between 57–63 mmHg for 30 minutes.ResultsThe step with RR of 60 after lung recruitment had the highest PEEP when compared with all other steps (17 [16,19] vs 14 [10, 17]cmH2O), but had lower driving pressures (13 [13,11] vs 16 [14, 17]cmH2O), higher P/F ratios (212 [191,243] vs 141 [105, 184] mmHg), lower shunt (23 [20, 23] vs 32 [27, 49]%), lower dead space ventilation (10 [0, 15] vs 30 [20, 37]%), and a more homogeneous alveolar ventilation distribution. There were no detrimental effects in terms of lung mechanics, hemodynamics, or gas exchange. Neither the addition of inspiratory pauses or the alveolar recruitment maneuver followed by decremental PEEP titration resulted in further reductions in VT.ConclusionsDuring MHFPPV set with RR of 60 bpm delivered by a conventional ventilator in severe ARDS swine model, neither the inspiratory pauses or PEEP titration after recruitment maneuver allowed reduction of VT significantly, however the last strategy decreased driving pressures and improved both shunt and dead space.

Highlights

  • Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients [1]

  • The step with respiratory rate (RR) of 60 after lung recruitment had the highest positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) when compared with all other steps (17 [16,19] vs 14 [10, 17]cmH2O), but had lower driving pressures (13 [13,11] vs 16 [14, 17]cmH2O), higher P/F ratios (212 [191,243] vs 141 [105, 184] mmHg), lower shunt (23 [20, 23] vs 32 [27, 49]%), lower dead space ventilation (10 [0, 15] vs 30 [20, 37]%), and a more homogeneous alveolar ventilation distribution

  • During moderately-high-frequency positive pressure ventilation (MHFPPV) set with RR of 60 bpm delivered by a conventional ventilator in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) swine model, neither the inspiratory pauses or PEEP titration after recruitment maneuver allowed reduction of VT significantly, the last strategy decreased driving pressures and improved both shunt and dead space

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients [1]. Low VT ventilation has the potential to lead to clinically significant hypercapnia-related acidosis, a potentially lifethreatening condition In this scenario, especially in more severe lung injury, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) has been tested, in order to provide adequate gas exchange even at very low VT. Especially in more severe lung injury, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) has been tested, in order to provide adequate gas exchange even at very low VT Studies on this technique had promising results [6,7,8] but results of more recent trials were disappointing [9, 10]. To investigate whether performing alveolar recruitment or adding inspiratory pauses could promote physiologic benefits (VT) during moderately-high-frequency positive pressure ventilation (MHFPPV) delivered by a conventional ventilator in a porcine model of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.