Sydow M, Thies K, Engel J, Golisch W, Buscher H, Zinserling J, Burchardi H
Zentrum Anaesthesiologie, Rettungs- und Intensivmedizin, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.
Anaesthesist. 1996 Nov;45(11):1051-8. doi: 10.1007/s001010050339.
During pressure support ventilation (PSV), the timing of the breathing cycle is mainly controlled by the patient. Therefore, the delivered flow pattern during PSV might be better synchronised with the patient's demands than during volume-assisted ventilation. In several modern ventilators, inspiration is terminated when the inspiratory flow decreases to 25% of the initial peak value. However, this timing algorithm might cause premature inspiration termination if the initial peak flow is high. This could result not only in an increased risk of dyssynchronization between the patient and the ventilator, but also in reduced ventilatory support. On the other hand, a decreased peak flow might inappropriately increase the patient's inspiratory effort. The aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of the variation of the initial peak-flow rate during PSV on respiratory pattern and mechanical work of breathing.
Six patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and six patients with no or minor nonobstructive lung pathology (control) were studied during PSV with different inspiratory flow rates by variations of the pressurisation time (Evita I, Drägerwerke, Lübeck, Germany). During the study period all patients were in stable circulatory conditions and in the weaning phase.
Patients were studied in a 45 degrees semirecumbent position. Using the medium pressurization time (l s) during PSV the inspiratory pressure was individually adjusted to obtain a tidal volume of about 8 ml/kg body weight. Thereafter, measurements were performed during five pressurization times (< 0.1, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 s defined as T 0.1, T 0.5, T 1, T 1.5 and T 2) in random order, while maintaining the pressure support setting at the ventilator. Between each measurement steady-state was attained. Positive end-exspiratory pressure (PEEP) and FIO2 were maintained at prestudy levels and remained constant during the study period. Informed consent was obtained from each patient or his next of kin. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of our medical faculty. Gas flow was measured at the proximal end of the endotracheal tube with a pneumotachometer (Fleisch no. 2, Fleisch, Lausanne, Switzerland) and a differential pressure transducer. Tracheal pressure (Paw) was determined in the same position with a second differential pressure transducer (Dr. Fenyves & Gut, Basel, Switzerland). Esophageal pressure (Pes) was obtained by a nasogastric balloon-catheter (Mallinckrodt, Argyle, NY, USA) connected to a further differential pressure transducer of the same type as described above. The balloon was positioned 2-3 cm above the dome of the diaphragm. The correct balloon position was verified by an occlusion test as described elsewhere. The data were sampled after A/D conversion with a frequency of 20 Hz and processed on an IBM-compatible PC. Software for data collection and processing was self-programmed using a commercially available software program (Asyst 4.0, Asyst Software Technologies, Rochester, NY, USA). Patient's inspiratory work of breathing Wpi (mJ/l) was calculated from Pes/ volume plots according to the modified Campbell's diagram. Dynamic intrinsic PEEP (PEEPidyn) was obtained from esophageal pressure tracings relative to airway pressure as the deflection in Pes before the initiation of inspiratory flow Patient's additive work of breathing (Wadd) against ventilator system resistance was calculated directly from Paw/V tracings when Paw was lower than the pressure on the compliance curve. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for statistical analysis, followed by post hoc testing of the least significant difference between means for multiple comparisons. Probability values less than 0.05 were considered as significant.
COPD patients had significantly higher pressure support than control patients. With decreasing inspiratory flow, Wpi increased significantly in COPD patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
在压力支持通气(PSV)期间,呼吸周期的定时主要由患者控制。因此,与容量辅助通气相比,PSV期间输送的气流模式可能与患者的需求更好地同步。在一些现代呼吸机中,当吸气流量降至初始峰值的25%时,吸气终止。然而,如果初始峰值流量较高,这种定时算法可能会导致吸气过早终止。这不仅会增加患者与呼吸机不同步的风险,还会降低通气支持。另一方面,峰值流量降低可能会不适当地增加患者的吸气努力。我们研究的目的是评估PSV期间初始峰值流速变化对呼吸模式和呼吸机械功的影响。
对6例慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者和6例无或有轻微非阻塞性肺部病变的患者(对照组)在PSV期间通过改变加压时间(Evita I,德尔格公司,吕贝克,德国)以不同的吸气流量进行了研究。在研究期间,所有患者循环状况稳定且处于撤机阶段。
患者取45度半卧位进行研究。在PSV期间使用中等加压时间(1秒),将吸气压力个体化调整以获得约8 ml/kg体重的潮气量。此后,在五个加压时间(<0.1、0.5、1、1.5、2秒,定义为T0.1、T0.5、T1、T1.5和T2)下随机进行测量,同时保持呼吸机上的压力支持设置不变。每次测量之间达到稳态。呼气末正压(PEEP)和吸入氧浓度(FIO2)维持在研究前水平且在研究期间保持恒定。获得了每位患者或其近亲的知情同意。研究方案得到了我们医学院伦理委员会的批准。使用呼吸流速计(Fleisch 2号,Fleisch,洛桑,瑞士)和差压传感器在气管导管近端测量气流。在同一位置使用第二个差压传感器(Dr. Fenyves & Gut,巴塞尔,瑞士)测定气管压力(Paw)。通过连接到与上述相同类型的另一个差压传感器的鼻胃气囊导管(Mallinckrodt,阿盖尔,纽约,美国)获得食管压力(Pes)。气囊置于膈肌穹窿上方2 - 3 cm处。如其他地方所述,通过闭塞试验验证气囊的正确位置。数据经A/D转换后以20 Hz的频率采样,并在IBM兼容个人电脑上进行处理。使用市售软件程序(Asyst 4.0,Asyst软件技术公司,罗切斯特,纽约,美国)自行编写数据收集和处理软件。根据修改后的坎贝尔图从Pes/容积图计算患者的吸气呼吸功Wpi(mJ/l)。动态内源性PEEP(PEEPidyn)从相对于气道压力的食管压力曲线中获得,即吸气气流开始前Pes的偏移。当Paw低于顺应性曲线上的压力时,直接从Paw/V曲线计算患者对抗呼吸机系统阻力的附加呼吸功(Wadd)。采用双向方差分析(ANOVA)进行统计分析,随后进行均值间最小显著差异的事后检验以进行多重比较。概率值小于0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
COPD患者的压力支持明显高于对照组患者。随着吸气流量降低,COPD患者的Wpi显著增加。(摘要截断)