Dmytriiev Dmytro, Melnychenko Mykola, Dobrovanov Oleksandr, Nazarchuk Oleksandr, Vidiscak Marian
Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, National Pirogov Memorial Medical University, Vinnytsya, Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
A. Getlik Clinic for Children and Adolescents, Slovak Medical University and University Hospital of Medicine, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Acute Crit Care. 2022 Nov;37(4):636-643. doi: 10.4266/acc.2022.00297. Epub 2022 Oct 19.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the hemodynamic protective effects of perioperative ventilation in pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and adaptive support ventilation (ASV) modes based on non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring indicators.
The study included 32 patients who were scheduled for planned open abdominal surgery. Depending on the chosen ventilation strategy, patients were included in two groups of PCV mode ventilation (n=14) and ASV mode ventilation (n=18). The hemodynamic effects of the ventilation strategies were assessed by estimated continuous cardiac output (esCCO) and cardiac index (esCCI).
Preoperative cardiac output (CO) was 6.1±1.3 L/min in group 1 patients and 6.3±0.8 L/min in group 2 patients, and preoperative cardiac index (CI) was 3.9±0.4 L/min/m2 in group 1 patients and 3.8±0.8 L/min/m2 in group 2 patients. The ejection fraction (EF) in group 1 subjects was 55.4%±0.3%; this rate was 56.5%±0.5% in group 2 subjects. Group 1 patients experienced a 14.7% CO decrease to 5.2±0.7 L/min, a 17.9% CI decrease to 3.2±0.6 L/min/m2 , and a 12.8% mean arterial pressure decrease to 82.3±9.4 mm Hg 30 minutes after the start of surgery. One hour after the start of surgery, the CO mean values of group 2 patients were lower than baseline by 7.9% and differed from the dynamics of patients in group 1, in whom CO was lower than baseline by 13.1%. At the end of the operation, the CO values were lower than baseline by 11.5% and 6.3% in patients of groups 1 and 2, respectively. Our data showed that the changes in EF during and after surgery correlated with CO indicators determined by the esCCO.
In our study, perioperative ventilation in ASV mode was more protective than PCV mode and was characterized by lower tidal volume (16.2%) and driving pressure (12.1%). Hemodynamically-controlled mechanical ventilation reduces the negative impact of cardiopulmonary interactions.
本研究旨在基于无创血流动力学监测指标,评估压力控制通气(PCV)和适应性支持通气(ASV)模式下围手术期通气的血流动力学保护作用。
本研究纳入32例计划行开放性腹部手术的患者。根据所选通气策略,患者被分为PCV模式通气组(n = 14)和ASV模式通气组(n = 18)。通过估计连续心输出量(esCCO)和心脏指数(esCCI)评估通气策略的血流动力学效应。
第1组患者术前心输出量(CO)为6.1±1.3L/min,第2组患者为6.3±0.8L/min;第1组患者术前心脏指数(CI)为3.9±0.4L/min/m²,第2组患者为3.8±0.8L/min/m²。第1组受试者的射血分数(EF)为55.4%±0.3%;第2组受试者的该比率为56.5%±0.5%。手术开始30分钟后,第1组患者的CO下降14.7%,降至5.2±0.7L/min,CI下降17.9%,降至3.2±0.6L/min/m²,平均动脉压下降12.8%,降至82.3±9.4mmHg。手术开始1小时后,第2组患者的CO平均值比基线低7.9%,与第1组患者的变化动态不同,第1组患者的CO比基线低13.1%。手术结束时,第1组和第2组患者的CO值分别比基线低11.5%和6.3%。我们的数据表明,手术期间和术后EF的变化与esCCO测定的CO指标相关。
在我们的研究中,ASV模式下的围手术期通气比PCV模式更具保护作用,其特点是潮气量(16.2%)和驱动压力(12.1%)更低。血流动力学控制的机械通气可减少心肺相互作用的负面影响。