Suppr超能文献

油酸诱导的肺损伤中压力控制反比通气的功能与形态学分析

A functional and morphologic analysis of pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation in oleic acid-induced lung injury.

作者信息

Ludwigs U, Klingstedt C, Baehrendtz S, Wegenius G, Hedenstierna G

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

Chest. 1994 Sep;106(3):925-31. doi: 10.1378/chest.106.3.925.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare volume-controlled ventilation (VCV PEEP) with pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation (PCIRV) at equal levels of end-expiratory pressure.

DESIGN

Animal study using an oleic acid lung injury model with random application of VCV PEEP and PCIRV.

SETTING

Experimental laboratory investigation at the Department of Clinical Physiology at Uppsala University.

ANIMALS

Twelve pigs.

INTERVENTIONS

VCV PEEP and PCIRV at an end-expiratory pressure level of 10 cm H2O.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Lung mechanics, hemodynamics, and gas exchange. Recruitment of lung tissue, regional lung density, and distribution of inspired gas by computed tomography. Mean and peak airway pressures were 29 and 35 cm H2O with PCIRV and 17 and 45 cm H2O with VCV PEEP. Cardiac output and mean systemic blood pressure were lower with PCIRV (2.5 L/min and 82 mm Hg) than with VCV PEEP (3.1 L/min and 97 mm Hg). Physiologic dead space was 24 percent with VCV PEEP and 20 percent with PCIRV. Static compliance, arterial oxygen tension, and functional residual capacity were equal between the two ventilatory modes. End-expiratory, end-inspiratory, and dynamic computed tomographic densities were equal between VCV PEEP and PCIRV. Nonaerated and poorly aerated lung areas were of equal size with VCV PEEP and PCIRV.

CONCLUSIONS

PCIRV was no better than VCV with similar PEEP levels in alveolar recruitment and aeration of the lung tissues or in oxygenating the blood. Cardiac output was lower with PCIRV than with VCV, causing lower oxygen delivery to peripheral tissues. PCIRV does allow for a reduction in minute ventilation and for lowering peak airway pressure.

摘要

研究目的

在呼气末压力相等的水平下,比较容量控制通气(VCV PEEP)和压力控制反比通气(PCIRV)。

设计

采用油酸诱导的肺损伤模型,随机应用VCV PEEP和PCIRV的动物研究。

地点

乌普萨拉大学临床生理学系的实验性实验室研究。

动物

12头猪。

干预措施

呼气末压力水平为10 cm H2O时的VCV PEEP和PCIRV。

测量与结果

肺力学、血流动力学和气体交换。通过计算机断层扫描测量肺组织复张、区域肺密度和吸入气体分布。PCIRV时平均气道压和峰值气道压分别为29 cm H2O和35 cm H2O,VCV PEEP时分别为17 cm H2O和45 cm H2O。PCIRV时的心输出量和平均体循环血压(2.5 L/min和82 mmHg)低于VCV PEEP(3.1 L/min和97 mmHg)。VCV PEEP时生理死腔为24%,PCIRV时为20%。两种通气模式下的静态顺应性、动脉血氧张力和功能残气量相等。VCV PEEP和PCIRV之间呼气末、吸气末和动态计算机断层扫描密度相等。VCV PEEP和PCIRV时无气和通气不良的肺区域大小相等。

结论

在肺泡复张、肺组织通气或血液氧合方面,PEEP水平相似时,PCIRV并不优于VCV。PCIRV时的心输出量低于VCV,导致外周组织的氧输送降低。PCIRV确实可以减少分钟通气量并降低峰值气道压。

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