Philip-Joët F F, Paganelli F F, Dutau H L, Saadjian A Y
Department of Pneumology, CHU Nord, Marseille, France.
Respiration. 1999;66(2):136-43. doi: 10.1159/000029355.
Benefits of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients presenting with chronic heart failure (CHF) are controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the hemodynamic effects of CPAP and bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) in patients with or without CHF.
Twenty patients with CHF and 7 with normal left ventricular function underwent cardiac catheterization. Measurements were made before and after three 20-min periods of BiPAP: expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) = 8 cm H2O and inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) = 12 cm H2O, EPAP = 10 cm H2O and IPAP = 15 cm H2O, and CPAP = EPAP = IPAP = 10 cm H2O administered in random order. Positive pressure ventilation decreased cardiac output (CO) and stroke volume. No change was observed in either pulmonary or systemic arterial pressure. There was no difference in the hemodynamic effects of the three ventilation settings. Only mean pulmonary wedge pressure (MPWP) and heart rate were lower with CPAP than with BiPAP. CO decreased only in patients with low MPWP (</=12 mm Hg). BiPAP ventilation increased PaO2 and decreased PaCO2 more than CPAP.
In patients with cardiac failure, a decrease in CO occurs both during CPAP and BiPAP, when pulmonary wedge pressure is low (</=12 mm Hg).
对于慢性心力衰竭(CHF)患者,经鼻持续气道正压通气(CPAP)的益处存在争议。本研究旨在比较CPAP和双水平气道正压通气(BiPAP)对有无CHF患者的血流动力学影响。
20例CHF患者和7例左心室功能正常的患者接受了心导管检查。在三个20分钟的BiPAP通气阶段前后进行测量:呼气末正压(EPAP)=8 cm H₂O,吸气正压(IPAP)=12 cm H₂O;EPAP = 10 cm H₂O,IPAP = 15 cm H₂O;CPAP = EPAP = IPAP = 10 cm H₂O,通气顺序随机。正压通气降低了心输出量(CO)和每搏输出量。肺或体循环动脉压未见变化。三种通气设置的血流动力学影响无差异。仅CPAP时的平均肺楔压(MPWP)和心率低于BiPAP。仅在MPWP较低(≤12 mmHg)的患者中CO降低。BiPAP通气比CPAP更能提高PaO₂并降低PaCO₂。
在心力衰竭患者中,当肺楔压较低(≤12 mmHg)时,CPAP和BiPAP期间CO均会降低。