IntroductionTo investigate the effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on respiratory function and hemodynamics in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with normal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP < 12 mmHg) and with intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH, defined as IAP ≥ 12 mmHg) during lung protective ventilation and a decremental PEEP, a prospective, observational clinical pilot study was performed.MethodsTwenty patients with ALI/ARDS with normal IAP or IAH treated in the surgical intensive care unit in a university hospital were studied. The mean IAP in patients with IAH and normal IAP was 16 ± 3 mmHg and 8 ± 3 mmHg, respectively (P < 0.001). At different PEEP levels (5, 10, 15, 20 cmH2O) we measured respiratory mechanics, partitioned into its lung and chest wall components, alveolar recruitment, gas-exchange, hemodynamics, extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) and intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI).ResultsWe found that ALI/ARDS patients with IAH, as compared to those with normal IAP, were characterized by: a) no differences in gas-exchange, respiratory mechanics, partitioned into its lung and chest wall components, as well as hemodynamics and EVLWI/ITBVI; b) decreased elastance of the respiratory system and the lung, but no differences in alveolar recruitment and oxygenation or hemodynamics, when PEEP was increased at 10 and 15cmH2O; c) at higher levels of PEEP, EVLWI was lower in ALI/ARDS patients with IAH as compared with those with normal IAP.ConclusionsIAH, within the limits of IAP measured in the present study, does not affect interpretation of respiratory mechanics, alveolar recruitment and hemodynamics.
IntroductionTo test the hypothesis that open lung (OL) ventilatory strategies using high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) or controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) compared to CMV with lower positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improve respiratory function while minimizing lung injury as well as systemic inflammation, a prospective randomized study was performed at a university animal laboratory using three different lung conditions.MethodsSeventy-eight adult male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) uninjured (UI), (2) saline washout (SW), and (3) intraperitoneal/intravenous Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced lung injury. Within each group, animals were further randomized to (1) OL with HFOV, (2) OL with CMV with "best" PEEP set according to the minimal static elastance of the respiratory system (BP-CMV), and (3) CMV with low PEEP (LP-CMV). They were then ventilated for 6 hours. HFOV was set with mean airway pressure (PmeanHFOV) at 2 cm H2O above the mean airway pressure recorded at BP-CMV (PmeanBP-CMV) following a recruitment manoeuvre. Six animals served as unventilated controls (C). Gas-exchange, respiratory system mechanics, lung histology, plasma cytokines, as well as cytokines and types I and III procollagen (PCI and PCIII) mRNA expression in lung tissue were measured.ResultsWe found that (1) in both SW and LPS, HFOV and BP-CMV improved gas exchange and mechanics with lower lung injury compared to LP-CMV, (2) in SW; HFOV yielded better oxygenation than BP-CMV; (3) in SW, interleukin (IL)-6 mRNA expression was lower during BP-CMV and HFOV compared to LP-CMV, while in LPS inflammatory response was independent of the ventilatory mode; and (4) PCIII mRNA expression decreased in all groups and ventilatory modes, with the decrease being highest in LPS.ConclusionsOpen lung ventilatory strategies associated with HFOV or BP-CMV improved respiratory function and minimized lung injury compared to LP-CMV. Therefore, HFOV with PmeanHFOV set 2 cm H2O above the PmeanBP-CMV following a recruitment manoeuvre is as beneficial as BP-CMV.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.