Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital of Geneva, 4 Rue Gabrielle Perret-Gentil, 1211, Genève 14, Switzerland,
Intensive Care Med. 2013 Nov;39(11):2003-10. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-3032-7. Epub 2013 Aug 9.
Pressure preset ventilation (PPV) modes with set inspiratory time can be classified according to their ability to synchronize pressure delivery with patient's inspiratory efforts (i-synchronization). Non-i-synchronized (like airway pressure release ventilation, APRV), partially i-synchronized (like biphasic airway pressure), and fully i-synchronized modes (like assist-pressure control) can be distinguished. Under identical ventilatory settings across PPV modes, the degree of i-synchronization may affect tidal volume (VT), transpulmonary pressure (PTP), and their variability. We performed bench and clinical studies.
In the bench study, all the PPV modes of five ventilators were tested with an active lung simulator. Spontaneous efforts of -10 cmH2O at rates of 20 and 30 breaths/min were simulated. Ventilator settings were high pressure 30 cmH2O, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) 15 cmH2O, frequency 15 breaths/min, and inspiratory to expiratory ratios (I:E) 1:3 and 3:1. In the clinical studies, data from eight intubated patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and ventilated with APRV were compared to the bench tests. In four additional ARDS patients, each of the PPV modes was compared.
As the degree of i-synchronization among the different PPV modes increased, mean VT and PTP swings markedly increased while breathing variability decreased. This was consistent with clinical comparison in four ARDS patients. Observational results in eight ARDS patients show low VT and a high variability with APRV.
Despite identical ventilator settings, the different PPV modes lead to substantial differences in VT, PTP, and breathing variability in the presence spontaneous efforts. Clinicians should be aware of the possible harmful effects of i-synchronization especially when high VT is undesirable.
具有预设吸气时间的压力预设通气(PPV)模式可根据其与患者吸气努力同步输送压力的能力进行分类(i 同步)。可以区分非 i 同步(如气道压力释放通气,APRV)、部分 i 同步(如双相气道压力)和完全 i 同步模式(如辅助压力控制)。在跨 PPV 模式相同的通气设置下,i 同步的程度可能会影响潮气量(VT)、跨肺压(PTP)及其变异性。我们进行了台架和临床研究。
在台架研究中,使用主动肺模拟器对五台呼吸机的所有 PPV 模式进行了测试。模拟了-10cmH2O 的自主努力,频率分别为 20 和 30 次/分钟。呼吸机设置为高压 30cmH2O、呼气末正压(PEEP)15cmH2O、频率 15 次/分钟,吸气与呼气比(I:E)为 1:3 和 3:1。在临床研究中,将急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者的插管数据与 APRV 进行了比较,共 8 名患者接受了 ARDS 治疗。在另外 4 名 ARDS 患者中,比较了每个 PPV 模式。
随着不同 PPV 模式之间的 i 同步程度的增加,平均 VT 和 PTP 波动明显增加,而呼吸变异性降低。这与 4 名 ARDS 患者的临床比较一致。8 名 ARDS 患者的观察结果显示,APRV 时 VT 较低且变异性较高。
尽管呼吸机设置相同,但在存在自主努力的情况下,不同的 PPV 模式会导致 VT、PTP 和呼吸变异性的显著差异。临床医生应注意 i 同步的可能有害影响,特别是在不希望高 VT 时。