Suppr超能文献

在人类急性呼吸衰竭中使用呼气末正压通气或高频喷射通气(HFJV)进行间歇正压通气,或单独使用HFJV。

Intermittent positive pressure ventilation with either positive end-expiratory pressure or high frequency jet ventilation (HFJV), or HFJV alone in human acute respiratory failure.

作者信息

Brichant J F, Rouby J J, Viars P

出版信息

Anesth Analg. 1986 Nov;65(11):1135-42.

PMID:3094403
Abstract

Continuous Positive Pressure Ventilation (CPPV), High-Frequency Jet Ventilation (HFJV), and a combination of HFJV with Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation (CV) were randomly compared in 13 critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory failure. Ventilatory settings were chosen in order to apply the same mean airway pressure (Paw) during the three modes. Respiratory frequencies were adjusted during CPPV (16 +/- 2 breaths/min) and HFJV (235 +/- 32 breaths/min) to achieve the same level of PaCO2 and were then combined during CV. All patients were heavily sedated during the study and had had peripheral and balloon-tipped pulmonary arterial catheters previously inserted. After a steady state at FIO2 1 in each mode of ventilation, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were measured. A Paw of 13.8 +/- 2.9 mm Hg was applied to each patient by using a PEEP of 7.4 mm Hg during CPPV; a driving pressure of 2.9 +/- 0.2 bars and an I/E ratio of 0.43 during HFJV; and by combining HFJV, using a driving pressure of 1.2 +/- 0.3 bars with intermittent positive pressure ventilation during CV. There were no significant differences in any of the hemodynamic or respiratory parameters measured, except for a significant decrease in PaCO2 during CV when compared to CPPV or HFJV. We concluded that 1) arterial oxygenation and cardiac output depend mainly on Paw independent of the method used to increase Paw and 2) CV can improve CO2 elimination without increasing Paw.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

在13例患有严重急性呼吸衰竭的重症患者中,对持续气道正压通气(CPPV)、高频喷射通气(HFJV)以及HFJV与间歇正压通气联合应用(CV)进行了随机对比研究。选择通气设置以便在三种模式下施加相同的平均气道压(Paw)。在CPPV(16±2次/分钟)和HFJV(235±32次/分钟)期间调整呼吸频率以达到相同水平的PaCO2,然后在CV期间将二者联合应用。研究期间所有患者均深度镇静,且此前已插入外周和肺动脉漂浮导管。在每种通气模式下FiO2为1达到稳定状态后,测量血流动力学和呼吸参数。在CPPV期间通过使用7.4 mmHg的呼气末正压向每位患者施加13.8±2.9 mmHg的Paw;在HFJV期间驱动压为2.9±0.2巴,吸呼比为0.43;在CV期间通过将驱动压为1.2±0.3巴的HFJV与间歇正压通气联合应用。除了与CPPV或HFJV相比CV期间PaCO2显著降低外,所测量的任何血流动力学或呼吸参数均无显著差异。我们得出结论:1)动脉氧合和心输出量主要取决于Paw,与增加Paw所使用的方法无关;2)CV可在不增加Paw的情况下改善二氧化碳清除。(摘要截短为250字)

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