Suppr超能文献

婴儿呼吸支持鼻通气模式下呼吸努力程度的比较

Comparison of Effort of Breathing for Infants on Nasal Modes of Respiratory Support.

作者信息

Kamerkar Asavari, Hotz Justin, Morzov Rica, Newth Christopher J L, Ross Patrick A, Khemani Robinder G

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.

出版信息

J Pediatr. 2017 Jun;185:26-32.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.02.060. Epub 2017 Mar 30.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To directly compare effort of breathing between high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), nasal intermittent mechanical ventilation (NIMV), and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP).

STUDY DESIGN

This was a single center prospective cross-over study for patients <6 months in the cardiothoracic or pediatric intensive care unit receiving nasal noninvasive respiratory support after extubation. We measured effort of breathing using esophageal manometry with pressure-rate product (PRP) on all 3 modes. NIMV synchrony was determined by comparing patient efforts (esophageal manometry) with mechanically delivered breaths (spirometry in ventilator circuit). On NIMV, PRP and synchrony was also measured after adding a nasal clip on 26 patients.

RESULTS

Forty-two children were included. Median (IQR) age was 2 (0.5, 4) months. There was no difference in median PRP between HFNC 6 liters per minute, 355 (270,550), NIMV 12/5 cm HO, 341 (235, 472), and NCPAP 5 cm HO, 340 (245,506) (P?=?.33). Results were similar regardless of HFNC flow rate or NIMV inspiratory pressure. Median PRP on CPAP of 5 cm HO prior to extubation 255 (176, 375) was significantly lower than all postextubation values (P??.07)). However, as NIMV synchrony improved (>60%), PRP on NIMV was lower than on HFNC.

CONCLUSIONS

For infants, effort of breathing is similar on HFNC, NIMV, and NCPAP after extubation, regardless of flow rate or inspiratory pressure. We speculate that bi-level NIMV may be superior if high levels of synchrony can be achieved.

摘要

目的

直接比较高流量鼻导管(HFNC)、鼻间歇机械通气(NIMV)和鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)时的呼吸用力情况。

研究设计

这是一项单中心前瞻性交叉研究,针对心胸或儿科重症监护病房中6个月以下、拔管后接受鼻无创呼吸支持的患者。我们在所有3种模式下使用食管测压法和压力-速率乘积(PRP)来测量呼吸用力情况。通过比较患者用力情况(食管测压)和机械输送的呼吸(呼吸机回路中的肺量计)来确定NIMV同步性。在NIMV模式下,还对26例患者佩戴鼻夹后测量了PRP和同步性。

结果

纳入42名儿童。中位(四分位间距)年龄为2(0.5,4)个月。每分钟6升的HFNC模式下PRP中位数为355(270,550),12/5厘米水柱的NIMV模式下为341(235,472),5厘米水柱的NCPAP模式下为340(245,506),三者之间无差异(P = 0.33)。无论HFNC流速或NIMV吸气压力如何,结果相似。拔管前5厘米水柱CPAP模式下的PRP中位数255(176,375)显著低于所有拔管后的值(P < 0.002)。在NIMV模式下,不到50%的患者用力能产生呼吸机呼吸,佩戴鼻夹后无改善(P > 0.07)。然而随着NIMV同步性改善(>60%),NIMV模式下的PRP低于HFNC模式。

结论

对于婴儿,拔管后HFNC、NIMV和NCPAP模式下的呼吸用力情况相似,无论流速或吸气压力如何。我们推测,如果能实现高水平同步性,双水平NIMV可能更具优势。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

1
Pediatric extubation readiness tests should not use pressure support.小儿拔管准备测试不应使用压力支持。
Intensive Care Med. 2016 Aug;42(8):1214-22. doi: 10.1007/s00134-016-4387-3. Epub 2016 Jun 18.

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