高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Variable Ventilation Is Equally Effective as Conventional Pressure Control Ventilation for Optimizing Lung Function in a Rabbit Model of ARDS.

文献详情

资源类型:
Pubmed体系:
机构: [1]Unit for Anesthesiological Investigations, Geneva University Hospitals – University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, [2]InsermUA7 STROBE Laboratory, Department of Clinical Physiology, Sleep and Exercise, Grenoble University Hospital, Grenoble,France, [3]Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China, [4]MTA-SZTEDermatological Research Group, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary, [5]Department of Medical Physics and Informatics,University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: ventilator-induced lung injury variable ventilation ARDS respiratory mechanics gas exchange PEEP protective ventilation

摘要:
Introducing mathematically derived variability (MVV) into the otherwise monotonous conventional mechanical ventilation has been suggested to improve lung recruitment and gas exchange. Although the application of a ventilation pattern based on variations in physiological breathing (PVV) is beneficial for healthy lungs, its value in the presence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has not been characterized. We therefore aimed at comparing conventional pressure-controlled ventilation with (PCS) or without regular sighs (PCV) to MVV and PVV at two levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in a model of severe ARDS.Anesthetised rabbits (n = 54) were mechanically ventilated and severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 150 mmHg) was induced by combining whole lung lavage, i.v. endotoxin and injurious ventilation. Rabbits were then randomly assigned to be ventilated with PVV, MVV, PCV, or PCS for 5 h while maintaining either 6 or 9 cmH2O PEEP. Ventilation parameters, blood gas indices and respiratory mechanics (tissue damping, G, and elastance, H) were recorded hourly. Serum cytokine levels were assessed with ELISA and lung histology was analyzed.Although no progression of lung injury was observed after 5 h of ventilation at PEEP 6 cmH2O with PVV and PCV, values for G (58.8 ± 71.1[half-width of 95% CI]% and 40.8 ± 39.0%, respectively), H (54.5 ± 57.2%, 50.7 ± 28.3%), partial pressure of carbon-dioxide (PaCO2, 43.9 ± 23.8%, 46.2 ± 35.4%) and pH (-4.6 ± 3.3%, -4.6 ± 2.2%) worsened with PCS and MVV. Regardless of ventilation pattern, application of a higher PEEP improved lung function and precluded progression of lung injury and inflammation. Histology lung injury scores were elevated in all groups with no difference between groups at either PEEP level.At moderate PEEP, variable ventilation based on a pre-recorded physiological breathing pattern protected against progression of lung injury equally to the conventional pressure-controlled mode, whereas mathematical variability or application of regular sighs caused worsening in lung mechanics. This outcome may be related to the excessive increases in peak inspiratory pressure with the latter ventilation modes. However, a greater benefit on respiratory mechanics and gas exchange could be obtained by elevating PEEP, compared to the ventilation mode in severe ARDS.

基金:
语种:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2018]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 生理学
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 3 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 生理学
第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Unit for Anesthesiological Investigations, Geneva University Hospitals – University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland,
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:23549 今日访问量:2 总访问量:1284 更新日期:2025-04-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:北京市东城区东交民巷1号(100730)