Dellinger R Phillip, Jean Smith, Cinel Ismail, Tay Christina, Rajanala Susmita, Glickman Yael A, Parrillo Joseph E
Division of Cardiovascular Disease and Critical Care Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson School of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Cooper University Hospital, Camden, NJ 08103, USA.
Crit Care. 2007;11(1):R26. doi: 10.1186/cc5706.
There are several ventilator modes that are used for maintenance mechanical ventilation but no conclusive evidence that one mode of ventilation is better than another. Vibration response imaging is a novel bedside imaging technique that displays vibration energy of lung sounds generated during the respiratory cycle as a real-time structural and functional image of the respiration process. In this study, we objectively evaluated the differences in regional lung vibration during different modes of mechanical ventilation by means of this new technology.
Vibration response imaging was performed on 38 patients on assist volume control, assist pressure control, and pressure support modes of mechanical ventilation with constant tidal volumes. Images and vibration intensities of three lung regions at maximal inspiration were analyzed.
There was a significant increase in overall geographical area (p < 0.001) and vibration intensity (p < 0.02) in pressure control and pressure support (greatest in pressure support), compared to volume control, when each patient served as his or her own control while targeting the same tidal volume in each mode. This increase in geographical area and vibration intensity occurred primarily in the lower lung regions. The relative percentage increases were 28.5% from volume control to pressure support and 18.8% from volume control to pressure control (p < 0.05). Concomitantly, the areas of the image in the middle lung regions decreased by 3.6% from volume control to pressure support and by 3.7% from volume control to pressure control (p < 0.05). In addition, analysis of regional vibration intensity showed a 35.5% relative percentage increase in the lower region with pressure support versus volume control (p < 0.05).
Pressure support and (to a lesser extent) pressure control modes cause a shift of vibration toward lower lung regions compared to volume control when tidal volumes are held constant. Better patient synchronization with the ventilator, greater downward movement of the diaphragm, and decelerating flow waveform are potential physiologic explanations for the redistribution of vibration energy to lower lung regions in pressure-targeted modes of mechanical ventilation.
有多种通气模式用于维持机械通气,但尚无确凿证据表明一种通气模式优于另一种。振动反应成像(VRI)是一种新型的床旁成像技术,可将呼吸周期中产生的肺音振动能量显示为呼吸过程的实时结构和功能图像。在本研究中,我们借助这项新技术客观评估了不同机械通气模式下肺区域振动的差异。
对38例接受辅助容量控制、辅助压力控制和压力支持模式机械通气且潮气量恒定的患者进行振动反应成像检查。分析最大吸气时三个肺区域的图像和振动强度。
当以每位患者自身作为对照,且在每种模式下设定相同潮气量时,与容量控制相比,压力控制和压力支持模式下的总体地理区域(p < 0.001)和振动强度(p < 0.02)显著增加(压力支持模式下增加最为明显)。地理区域和振动强度的增加主要发生在肺下部区域。从容量控制到压力支持,相对百分比增加28.5%;从容量控制到压力控制,相对百分比增加18.8%(p < 0.05)。同时,从容量控制到压力支持,肺中部区域的图像面积减少3.6%;从容量控制到压力控制,减少3.7%(p < 0.05)。此外,区域振动强度分析显示,与容量控制相比,压力支持模式下下部区域的相对百分比增加35.5%(p < 0.05)。
当潮气量保持恒定时,与容量控制相比,压力支持模式以及(程度稍轻的)压力控制模式会使振动向肺下部区域转移。患者与呼吸机更好的同步性、膈肌更大幅度的向下运动以及减速气流波形,是压力目标性机械通气模式下振动能量重新分布至肺下部区域的潜在生理学解释。