Longhini Federico, Colombo Davide, Pisani Lara, Idone Francesco, Chun Pan, Doorduin Jonne, Ling Liu, Alemani Moreno, Bruni Andrea, Zhaochen Jin, Tao Yu, Lu Weihua, Garofalo Eugenio, Carenzo Luca, Maggiore Salvatore Maurizio, Qiu Haibo, Heunks Leo, Antonelli Massimo, Nava Stefano, Navalesi Paolo
Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Sant'Andrea Hospital, ASL VC, Vercelli, Italy.
Anesthesia and Intensive Care, "Maggiore Della Carità" Hospital, Novara, Italy.
ERJ Open Res. 2017 Oct 4;3(4). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00075-2017. eCollection 2017 Oct.
The objective of this study was to assess ability to identify asynchronies during noninvasive ventilation (NIV) through ventilator waveforms according to experience and interface, and to ascertain the influence of breathing pattern and respiratory drive on sensitivity and prevalence of asynchronies. 35 expert and 35 nonexpert physicians evaluated 40 5-min NIV reports displaying flow-time and airway pressure-time tracings; identified asynchronies were compared with those ascertained by three examiners who evaluated the same reports displaying, additionally, tracings of diaphragm electrical activity. We determined: 1) sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values; 2) the correlation between the double true index (DTI) of each report ( the ratio between the sum of true positives and true negatives, and the overall breath count) and the corresponding asynchrony index (AI); and 3) the influence of breathing pattern and respiratory drive on both AI and sensitivity. Sensitivities to detect asynchronies were low either according to experience (0.20 (95% CI 0.14-0.29) for expert 0.21 (95% CI 0.12-0.30) for nonexpert, p=0.837) or interface (0.28 (95% CI 0.17-0.37) for mask 0.10 (95% CI 0.05-0.16) for helmet, p<0.0001). DTI inversely correlated with the AI (r=0.67, p<0.0001). Breathing pattern and respiratory drive did not affect prevalence of asynchronies and sensitivity. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during NIV is difficult to recognise solely by visual inspection of ventilator waveforms.
本研究的目的是根据经验和接口,通过呼吸机波形评估在无创通气(NIV)期间识别不同步的能力,并确定呼吸模式和呼吸驱动对不同步的敏感性和发生率的影响。35名专家医师和35名非专家医师评估了40份5分钟的NIV报告,这些报告显示了流速-时间和气道压力-时间曲线;将识别出的不同步与三名考官确定的不同步进行比较,这三名考官评估了相同的报告,此外还显示了膈肌电活动曲线。我们确定了:1)敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值;2)每份报告的双真指数(DTI)(真阳性和真阴性之和与总呼吸次数的比值)与相应的不同步指数(AI)之间的相关性;3)呼吸模式和呼吸驱动对AI和敏感性的影响。根据经验(专家为0.20(95%CI 0.14-0.29),非专家为0.21(95%CI 0.12-0.30),p=0.837)或接口(面罩为0.28(95%CI 0.17-0.37),头盔为0.10(95%CI 0.05-0.16),p<0.0001)检测不同步的敏感性均较低。DTI与AI呈负相关(r=0.67,p<0.0001)。呼吸模式和呼吸驱动不影响不同步的发生率和敏感性。在无创通气期间,患者-呼吸机不同步仅通过目视检查呼吸机波形很难识别。