Suppr超能文献

[The effect of positive pressure ventilation combined with diaphragm pacing on respiratory mechanics in patients with respiratory failure].

作者信息

Deng Yi-Jun, Ji You-Lin, Chen Lan-Ping, Jin Qin

机构信息

Intensive Care Unit, the First People's Hospital of Yancheng, Yancheng 224001, Jiangsu, China.

出版信息

Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2011 Apr;23(4):213-5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effects of combining positive pressure ventilation with diaphragm pacing on respiratory mechanics in patients with respiratory failure.

METHODS

Twenty patients with central respiratory failure were studied with cohorts. The effects on respiratory mechanics were respectively observed in patients in control group, in whom ventilation by positive pressure only, and patients in experimental group in whom ventilation was instituted by combining positive pressure ventilation with diaphragm pacing.

RESULTS

Compared with control group, mean airway pressure (Paw, cm H(2)O, 1 cm H(2)O= 0.098 kPa) and plateau pressure (Pplat, cm H(2)O) were significantly decreased in experimental group (Paw: 6.1±1.3 vs. 7.3±1.8; Pplat: 10.4±2.5 vs. 12.1±2.6, both P<0.05), while the negative value of peak esophageal pressure (P(PEAK ES) , cm H(2)O), the negative value of the difference between peak and basic esophageal pressure (dP(ES), cm H(2)O), transpulmonary pressure at end of inspiration hold (Ptp plat, cm H(2)O ), static compliance (Cst, ml/cm H(2)O) were significantly increased in experimental group (P(PEAK ES): -8.3± 1.9 vs. -3.2±1.4; dP(ES) : -11.2±2.6 vs. -8.2±2.2; Ptp plat: 23.6±3.8 vs. 15.6±3.1; Cst: 52.7±8.2 vs. 48.3±7.2, all P<0.05). No differences were found in airway resistance (Raw, cm H(2)O×L(-1) ×s(-1) ) and lung resistance (R(L), cm H(2)O×L(-1) ×s(-1) ) between experimental group and control group (Raw: 2.1±0.5 vs. 2.3±0.4; R(L): 2.9±0.6 vs. 3.1±0.5, both P>0.05). Work of breath by patient (WOBp, J/L) was significantly increased and work of breath by ventilator (WOBv, J/L) was significantly decreased in experimental group compared with control group (WOBp: 0.18±0.03 vs. 0; WOBv: 0.31±0.07 vs. 0.53±0.11, both P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with positive pressure ventilation , positive pressure ventilation combined with diaphragm pacing can decrease the Paw, increase intrathoracic negative pressure, transpulmonary pressure, and Cst, and decrease WOBv, while there is no effect on Raw and R(L).

摘要

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验