Mebrate Yoseph, Willson Keith, Manisty Charlotte H, Baruah Resham, Mayet Jamil, Hughes Alun D, Parker Kim H, Francis Darrel P
International Center for Circulatory Health, St. Mary's Hospital and Imperial College, London W2 1LA, United Kingdom.
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2009 Sep;107(3):696-706. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.90308.2008. Epub 2009 Jul 23.
We examine the potential to treat unstable ventilatory control (seen in periodic breathing, Cheyne-Stokes respiration, and central sleep apnea) with carefully controlled dynamic administration of supplementary CO(2), aiming to reduce ventilatory oscillations with minimum increment in mean CO(2). We used a standard mathematical model to explore the consequences of phasic CO(2) administration, with different timing and dosing algorithms. We found an optimal time window within the ventilation cycle (covering approximately 1/6 of the cycle) during which CO(2) delivery reduces ventilatory fluctuations by >95%. Outside that time, therapy is dramatically less effective: indeed, for more than two-thirds of the cycle, therapy increases ventilatory fluctuations >30%. Efficiency of stabilizing ventilation improved when the algorithm gave a graded increase in CO(2) dose (by controlling its duration or concentration) for more severe periodic breathing. Combining gradations of duration and concentration further increased efficiency of therapy by 22%. The (undesirable) increment in mean end-tidal CO(2) caused was 300 times smaller with dynamic therapy than with static therapy, to achieve the same degree of ventilatory stabilization (0.0005 vs. 0.1710 kPa). The increase in average ventilation was also much smaller with dynamic than static therapy (0.005 vs. 2.015 l/min). We conclude that, if administered dynamically, dramatically smaller quantities of CO(2) could be used to reduce periodic breathing, with minimal adverse effects. Algorithms adjusting both duration and concentration in real time would achieve this most efficiently. If developed clinically as a therapy for periodic breathing, this would minimize excess acidosis, hyperventilation, and sympathetic overactivation, compared with static treatment.
我们研究了通过精心控制动态补充二氧化碳来治疗不稳定通气控制(见于周期性呼吸、潮式呼吸和中枢性睡眠呼吸暂停)的潜力,旨在以平均二氧化碳的最小增量减少通气振荡。我们使用标准数学模型来探索不同时间和给药算法的阶段性二氧化碳给药的后果。我们发现在通气周期内存在一个最佳时间窗口(覆盖约1/6的周期),在此期间输送二氧化碳可使通气波动降低>95%。在该时间之外,治疗效果显著降低:实际上,在超过三分之二的周期内,治疗会使通气波动增加>30%。当算法针对更严重的周期性呼吸使二氧化碳剂量分级增加(通过控制其持续时间或浓度)时,稳定通气的效率得到提高。将持续时间和浓度的分级相结合可使治疗效率进一步提高22%。为达到相同程度的通气稳定(0.0005 vs. 0.1710 kPa),动态治疗导致的平均呼气末二氧化碳(不希望出现的)增量比静态治疗小300倍。动态治疗比静态治疗导致的平均通气增加也小得多(0.005 vs. 2.015 l/min)。我们得出结论,如果进行动态给药,可使用数量大幅减少的二氧化碳来减少周期性呼吸,且副作用最小。实时调整持续时间和浓度的算法将最有效地实现这一点。如果作为周期性呼吸的治疗方法在临床上得到开发,与静态治疗相比,这将使过度酸中毒、过度通气和交感神经过度激活最小化。