Karlsson Tomas, Gustavsson Jenny, Wellfelt Katrin, Günther Mattias
Department of Clinical Science and Education, Section of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Sjukhusbacken 10, 11883, Stockholm, Sweden.
Rapid Response Car AISAB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Intensive Care Med Exp. 2025 Mar 7;13(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s40635-025-00742-y.
Prehospital airway management is critical for maintaining oxygenation after severe trauma hemorrhage. In cases of semi-obstructed airways, intubation with an endotracheal tube may fail, whereas a 14 French intubating catheter may provide an alternative for ventilation. Expiratory ventilation assistance (EVA) through such a catheter could serve as a prehospital rescue option, particularly when oxygen supply is limited. This study evaluates whether EVA with ambient air is sufficient to maintain oxygenation and compares its effectiveness with pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV).
Twenty-three anesthetized swines (mean weight 58.3 kg, SD 4.6) were subjected to 32% blood volume hemorrhage and allocated to either EVA (n = 11) or PCV (n = 12). Historical data were used in the control group. Three phases were studied: 15 min without intervention (emulating initial prehospital care), 30 min of whole blood resuscitation, and 15 min post-resuscitation. Parameters including oxygen delivery (DO), oxygen consumption (VO), arterial saturation (SaO), intratracheal pressures, and lactate levels were measured.
EVA and PCV demonstrated similar effectiveness in maintaining indexed DO (p = 0.114), VO (p = 0.325), oxygen extraction rate (p = 0.841), and SaO (p = 0.097). Intratracheal pressures were significantly lower with EVA (p < 0.0001). EVA maintained clinically sufficient oxygenation (PaO > 8.6 kPa) but PaCO levels increased compared with control. Lactate levels were significantly lower in the EVA group during resuscitation (3.1 mmol/L vs. 4.8 mmol/L, p = 0.032).
Both EVA and PCV effectively maintained oxygen delivery and sufficient oxygenation after trauma hemorrhage and whole blood resuscitation. Lower intratracheal pressures and reduced lactate accumulation with EVA suggest it may be a viable prehospital rescue method, especially in scenarios with limited oxygen supply. Further investigation is warranted to optimize its application.
院前气道管理对于严重创伤出血后维持氧合至关重要。在气道半梗阻的情况下,气管内插管可能失败,而14法式气管插管导管可作为通气的替代方法。通过这种导管进行呼气通气辅助(EVA)可作为一种院前抢救选择,尤其是在氧气供应有限时。本研究评估使用环境空气进行EVA是否足以维持氧合,并将其有效性与压力控制通气(PCV)进行比较。
23头麻醉猪(平均体重58.3 kg,标准差4.6)接受32%血容量的出血,并分为EVA组(n = 11)或PCV组(n = 12)。对照组使用历史数据。研究了三个阶段:15分钟无干预(模拟初始院前护理)、30分钟全血复苏和复苏后15分钟。测量了包括氧输送(DO)、氧消耗(VO)、动脉饱和度(SaO)、气管内压力和乳酸水平等参数。
EVA和PCV在维持指数化DO(p = 0.114)、VO(p = 0.325)、氧摄取率(p = 0.841)和SaO(p = 0.097)方面显示出相似的有效性。EVA组的气管内压力显著更低(p < 0.0001)。EVA维持了临床上足够的氧合(PaO > 8.6 kPa),但与对照组相比,PaCO水平升高。复苏期间EVA组的乳酸水平显著更低(3.1 mmol/L对4.8 mmol/L,p = 0.032)。
EVA和PCV在创伤出血和全血复苏后均能有效维持氧输送和足够的氧合。EVA较低的气管内压力和减少的乳酸积累表明它可能是一种可行的院前抢救方法,尤其是在氧气供应有限的情况下。有必要进一步研究以优化其应用。