Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Solna, SE 171 76 Stockholm, Sweden.
Anesthesiology. 2010 Mar;112(3):682-7. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181cf40c8.
The literature on ventilation (V) and lung perfusion (Q) distributions during general anesthesia and controlled mechanical ventilation in supine and prone position is contradictory. The authors aimed to investigate whether V, Q, and ventilation to perfusion ratio (V/Q ratio) matching in anesthetized and mechanically ventilated volunteers are gravity dependent irrespective of posture.
Seven healthy volunteers were studied at two different occasions during general anesthesia and controlled mechanical ventilation. One occasion studied ventral to dorsal V and Q distributions in the supine posture and the other in the prone posture. Imaging was performed in supine posture at both occasions. A dual radiotracer technique and single photon emission computed tomography were used. V and Q were simultaneously tagged with Tc-Technegas (Tetley Manufacturing Ltd., Sydney, Australia) and In-labeled macroaggregates of human albumin (TechneScan LyoMAA, Mallinckrodt Medica, Petten, The Netherlands), respectively.
No differences in V between postures were observed. Q differed between postures, being more uniform over different lung regions in prone posture and dependent in supine posture. The contribution of the vertical direction to the total V/Q ratio heterogeneity was larger in supine (31.4%) than in prone (16.4%) (P = 0.0639, two-tailed, paired t test) posture.
During mechanical ventilation, prone posture favors a more evenly distributed Q between lung regions. V distribution is independent of posture. This results in a tendency toward lower V/Q gradients in the ventral to dorsal direction in prone compared with supine posture.
关于全身麻醉和机械通气时仰卧位和俯卧位下通气(V)和肺灌注(Q)分布的文献存在矛盾。作者旨在研究麻醉和机械通气的志愿者中 V、Q 和通气/灌注比值(V/Q 比值)的匹配是否受重力影响而与体位无关。
7 名健康志愿者在全身麻醉和机械通气期间的两个不同时机接受研究。一个时机研究仰卧位时的前后 V 和 Q 分布,另一个时机研究俯卧位时的 V 和 Q 分布。在这两个时机均在仰卧位进行成像。使用双放射性示踪剂技术和单光子发射计算机断层扫描。V 和 Q 分别用 Tc-Technegas(Tetley Manufacturing Ltd.,悉尼,澳大利亚)和 In 标记的人白蛋白微球(TechneScan LyoMAA,Mallinckrodt Medica,Petten,荷兰)同时进行标记。
观察到两种体位下 V 无差异。Q 存在体位差异,俯卧位时不同肺区的 Q 分布更均匀,仰卧位时 Q 分布依赖于重力。仰卧位时(31.4%)比俯卧位时(16.4%)(P = 0.0639,双侧,配对 t 检验)对总 V/Q 比值异质性的垂直方向贡献更大。
在机械通气期间,俯卧位有利于 Q 在肺区之间更均匀地分布。V 分布不受体位影响。这导致俯卧位时与仰卧位相比,腹侧到背侧方向的 V/Q 梯度更低。