Suppr超能文献

持续负压腹部压迫:作用机制及与俯卧位的比较。

Continuous negative abdominal pressure: mechanism of action and comparison with prone position.

机构信息

Physiology and Experimental Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children , Toronto, Ontario , Canada.

Departments of Critical Care Medicine and Anesthesia, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario , Canada.

出版信息

J Appl Physiol (1985). 2018 Jul 1;125(1):107-116. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01125.2017. Epub 2018 Mar 29.

Abstract

We recently reported that continuous negative abdominal pressure (CNAP) could recruit dorsal atelectasis in experimental lung injury and that oxygenation improved at different transpulmonary pressure values compared with increases in airway pressure (Yoshida T, Engelberts D, Otulakowski G, Katira BH, Post M, Ferguson ND, Brochard L, Amato MBP, Kavanagh BP. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 197: 534-537, 2018). The mechanism of recruitment with CNAP is uncertain, and its impact compared with a commonly proposed alternative approach to recruitment, prone positioning, is not known. We hypothesized that CNAP recruits lung by decreasing the vertical pleural pressure (P) gradient (i.e., difference between dependent and nondependent P), thought to be one mechanism of action of prone positioning. An established porcine model of lung injury (surfactant depletion followed by ventilator-induced lung injury) was used. CNAP was applied using a plexiglass chamber that completely enclosed the abdomen at a constant negative pressure (-5 cmHO). Lungs were recruited to maximal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP; 25 cmHO) and deflated in steps of PEEP (2 cmHO, 10 min each). CNAP lowered the P in dependent but not in nondependent lung, and therefore, in contrast to PEEP, it narrowed the vertical P gradient. CNAP increased respiratory system compliance and oxygenation and appeared to selectively displace the posterior diaphragm caudad (computerized tomography images). Compared with prone position without CNAP, CNAP in the supine position was associated with higher arterial partial pressure of oxygen and compliance, as well as greater homogeneity of ventilation. The mechanism of action of CNAP appears to be via selective narrowing of the vertical gradient of P. CNAP appears to offer physiological advantages over prone positioning. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Continuous negative abdominal pressure reduces the vertical gradient in (dependent vs. nondependent) pleural pressure and increases oxygenation and lung compliance; it is more effective than prone positioning at comparable levels of positive end-expiratory pressure.

摘要

我们最近报道称,持续的负腹压(CNAP)可募集实验性肺损伤中的背侧肺不张,与增加气道压力相比,在不同的跨肺压值下,氧合得到改善(Yoshida T、Engelberts D、Otulakowski G、Katira BH、Post M、Ferguson ND、Brochard L、Amato MBP、Kavanagh BP。美国呼吸与危重病医学杂志 197: 534-537, 2018)。CNAP 募集的机制尚不确定,与通常提出的另一种募集方法,即俯卧位相比,其影响尚不清楚。我们假设 CNAP 通过降低垂直胸膜压力(P)梯度(即依赖与非依赖 P 之间的差异)来募集肺,这被认为是俯卧位作用机制之一。使用已建立的猪肺损伤模型(表面活性剂耗竭后呼吸机诱导的肺损伤)。CNAP 通过使用完全包围腹部的有机玻璃室在恒定的负压(-5 cmHO)下施加。肺在最大呼气末正压(PEEP;25 cmHO)下募集,并以 PEEP(2 cmHO,每次 10 分钟)的步长萎陷。CNAP 降低了依赖侧但不降低非依赖侧的 P,因此,与 PEEP 相反,它缩小了垂直 P 梯度。CNAP 增加了呼吸系统顺应性和氧合,并似乎选择性地将后膈膜向下推(计算机断层扫描图像)。与没有 CNAP 的俯卧位相比,仰卧位时的 CNAP 与较高的动脉血氧分压和顺应性以及通气的更大均匀性相关。CNAP 的作用机制似乎是通过选择性缩小垂直 P 梯度。CNAP 似乎比俯卧位具有生理优势。新的和值得注意的是,持续的负腹压降低(依赖与非依赖)胸膜压力的垂直梯度,增加氧合和肺顺应性;与可比水平的呼气末正压相比,它比俯卧位更有效。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验