Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Pôle de Pneumologie, ORL & Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Service de Pneumologie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Physiother Theory Pract. 2019 Mar;35(3):199-205. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2018.1443185. Epub 2018 Feb 27.
: Impairment of global and regional pulmonary ventilations is a well-known consequence of general anesthesia. Positive expiratory pressure (PEP) or incentive spirometry (IS) is commonly prescribed, albeit their efficacy is poorly demonstrated. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of PEP and IS on lung ventilation and recruitment in patients after surgery involving anesthesia using electrical impedance tomography (EIT). : Ten male subjects (age = 61.2 ± 16.3 years; BMI = 25.3 ± 3.8 kg/m), free of pulmonary disease before being anesthetized, were recruited. Two series of manoeuvers (PEP and volume-oriented IS) were randomly performed with quiet breathing interposed between these phases. Pulmonary ventilation (ΔEELVVT ( - )) and recruitment (ΔEELI) were evaluated continuously in a semi-seated position during all phases by EIT. Comparisons between rest and treatment were performed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Rest phases were compared by a mixed ANOVA. Bonferroni method was used for comparisons. : ΔEELVVT ( - ) and ΔEELI were significantly increased by both techniques (+422% [ < 0.001]; +138% [ = 0.040] and +296% [ < 0.001]; +638% [ < 0.001] for PEP and IS, respectively). No difference was observed between both manoeuvers neither on ventilation nor on recruitment. This positive effect disappeared during the quiet breathing phases. : IS and PEP improved ventilation and recruitment instantaneously without remnant effect after stopping the exercise.
:全身麻醉后,肺部整体和区域性通气受损是众所周知的后果。常规定期使用呼气末正压通气(PEP)或激励式肺活量计(IS),但其疗效尚未得到充分证明。本研究旨在使用电阻抗断层成像术(EIT)评估 PEP 和 IS 对麻醉后手术患者肺部通气和复张的影响。
:共招募了 10 名男性受试者(年龄=61.2±16.3 岁;BMI=25.3±3.8kg/m),麻醉前无肺部疾病。在这些阶段之间插入安静呼吸,随机进行了两系列操作(PEP 和容量导向的 IS)。在半坐位置,通过 EIT 连续评估所有阶段的肺通气(ΔEELVVT(-))和复张(ΔEELI)。通过 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验比较休息和治疗之间的差异。通过混合方差分析比较休息阶段。使用 Bonferroni 方法进行比较。
:两种技术均显著增加了ΔEELVVT(-)和ΔEELI(分别为+422%[<0.001];+138%[=0.040]和+296%[<0.001];+638%[<0.001])。在通气和复张方面,两种操作之间均无差异。这种积极的影响在安静呼吸阶段消失了。
:IS 和 PEP 可立即改善通气和复张,停止运动后无残留效应。