Dataset Information

Comparison of the effects of open and closed aspiration on end-expiratory lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Alveoli tend to collapse in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Endotracheal aspiration may increase alveolar collapse due to the loss of end-expiratory lung volume (EELV). We aimed to compare the loss of EELV after open and closed suction in patients with ARDS.

Methods

This randomized crossover study included 20 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for ARDS. Open and closed suction were applied in a random order. Lung impedance was measured using electric impedance tomography. The change in end-expiratory lung impedance end of suction and at 1, 10, 20, and 30 min after suction, was used to represent the change in EELV. Arterial blood gas analyses and ventilatory parameters such as the plateau pressure (Pplat), driving pressure (Pdrive), and compliance of the respiratory system (CRS) were also recorded.

Results

Less volume loss was noted after closed suction than after open suction (mean ΔEELI: -2661 ± 1937 vs. -4415 ± 2363; mean difference: -1753; 95% CI [-2662, -844]; P = 0.001). EELI returned to baseline 10 min after closed suction but did not return to baseline even 30 min after open suction. After closed suction, the Pplat and Pdrive decreased while the CRS increased. Conversely, the Pplat and Pdrive increased while the CRS decreased after open suction.

Conclusions

Endotracheal aspiration may result in alveolar collapse due to loss of EELV. Given that closed suction is associated with less volume loss at end-expiration without worsening ventilatory parameters, it should be chosen over open suction in patients with ARDS.

SUBMITTER: Yildirim S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10834727 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the effects of open and closed aspiration on end-expiratory lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Yildirim Süleyman S Saygili Saba Mukaddes SM Süneçli Onur O Kirakli Cenk C

Korean journal of anesthesiology 20230522 1

<h4>Background</h4>Alveoli tend to collapse in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Endotracheal aspiration may increase alveolar collapse due to the loss of end-expiratory lung volume (EELV). We aimed to compare the loss of EELV after open and closed suction in patients with ARDS.<h4>Methods</h4>This randomized crossover study included 20 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for ARDS. Open and closed suction were applied in a random order. Lung impedance was m ...[more]

PMID: 37211764

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPositive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) benefits in acute respiratory distress syndrome are driven by lung dynamic strain reduction. This depends on the variable extent of alveolar recruitment. The recruitment-to-inflation ratio estimates recruitability across a 10-cm H2O PEEP range through a simplified maneuver. Whether recruitability is uniform or not across this range is unknown. The hypotheses of this study are that the recruitment-to-inflation ratio represents an accurate estimate of PEEP-induced changes in dynamic strain, but may show nonuniform behavior across the conventionally tested PEEP range (15 to 5 cm H2O).MethodsTwenty patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome underwent a decremental PEEP trial (PEEP 15 to 13 to 10 to 8 to 5 cm H2O). Respiratory mechanics and end-expiratory lung volume by nitrogen dilution were measured the end of each step. Gas exchange, recruited volume, recruitment-to-inflation ratio, and changes in dynamic, static, and total strain were computed between 15 and 5 cm H2O (global recruitment-to-inflation ratio) and within narrower PEEP ranges (granular recruitment-to-inflation ratio).ResultsBetween 15 and 5 cm H2O, median [interquartile range] global recruitment-to-inflation ratio was 1.27 [0.40 to 1.69] and displayed a linear correlation with PEEP-induced dynamic strain reduction (r = -0.94; P < 0.001). Intraindividual recruitment-to-inflation ratio variability within the narrower ranges was high (85% [70 to 109]). The relationship between granular recruitment-to-inflation ratio and PEEP was mathematically described by a nonlinear, quadratic equation (R2 = 0.96). Granular recruitment-to-inflation ratio across the narrower PEEP ranges itself had a linear correlation with PEEP-induced reduction in dynamic strain (r = -0.89; P < 0.001).ConclusionsBoth global and granular recruitment-to-inflation ratio accurately estimate PEEP-induced changes in lung dynamic strain. However, the effect of 10 cm H2O of PEEP on lung strain may be nonuniform. Granular recruitment-to-inflation ratio assessment within narrower PEEP ranges guided by end-expiratory lung volume measurement may aid more precise PEEP selection, especially when the recruitment-to-inflation ratio obtained with the simplified maneuver between PEEP 15 and 5 cm H2O yields intermediate values that are difficult to interpret for a proper choice between a high and low PEEP strategy.Editor’s perspective

Project description:BackgroundIn acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), response to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is variable according to different degrees of lung recruitability. The search for a tool to individualize PEEP based on patients' individual response is warranted. End-expiratory lung volume (EELV) assessment by nitrogen washing-washout aids bedside estimation of PEEP-induced alveolar recruitment and may therefore help titrate PEEP on patient's individual recruitability. We designed a randomized trial to test whether an individualized PEEP setting protocol driven by EELV measurement may improve a composite clinical outcome in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS (IPERPEEP trial).MethodsIPERPEEP is an open-label, multicenter, randomized trial that will be conducted in 10 intensive care units in Italy and will enroll 132 ARDS patients showing PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 150 mmHg within 24 h from endotracheal intubation while on mechanical ventilation with PEEP 5 cmH2O. To standardize lung volumes at study initiation, all patients will undergo mechanical ventilation with tidal volume of 6 ml/kg of predicted body weight and PEEP set to obtain a plateau pressure within 28 and 30 cmH2O for 30 min (EXPRESS PEEP). Afterwards, a 5-step decremental PEEP trial will be conducted (EXPRESS PEEP to PEEP 5 cmH2O), and EELV will be measured at each step. Recruitment-to-inflation ratio will be calculated for each PEEP range from EELV difference. Patients will be then randomized to receive mechanical ventilation with PEEP set according to the optimal recruitment observed in the PEEP trial (IPERPEEP arm) trial or to achieve a plateau pressure of 28-30 cmH2O (control arm, EXPRESS strategy). In both groups, tidal volume size, use of prone positioning and neuromuscular blocking agents, and weaning from PEEP and from mechanical ventilation will be standardized. The primary endpoint of the study is a composite clinical outcome incorporating in-ICU mortality, 60-day ventilator-free days, and serum interleukin-6 concentration over the course of the initial 72 h of treatment.DiscussionThe IPERPEEP study is a randomized trial powered to elucidate whether an individualized PEEP setting protocol based on bedside assessment of lung recruitability can improve a composite clinical outcome during moderate-to-severe ARDS.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04012073 . Registered 9 July 2019.

Project description:BackgroundThe study objective was to compare titration of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and with ventilator-embedded pressure-volume loop in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsWe have designed a prospective study with historical control group. Twenty-four severe ARDS patients (arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio, PaO2/FiO2 < 100 mmHg) were included in the EIT group and examined prospectively. Data from another 31 severe ARDS patients were evaluated retrospectively (control group). All patients were receiving medical care under identical general support guidelines and protective mechanical ventilation. The PEEP level selected in the EIT group was the intercept point of cumulated collapse and overdistension percentages curves. In the control group, optimal PEEP was selected 2 cmH2O above the lower inflection point on the static pressure-volume curve.ResultsPatients in the EIT group were younger (P < 0.05), and their mean plateau pressure was 1.5 cmH2O higher (P < 0.01). No differences in other baseline parameters such as APACHE II score, PaO2/FiO2, initial PEEP, driving pressure, tidal volume, and respiratory system compliance were found. Two hours after the first PEEP titration, significantly higher PEEP, compliance, and lower driving pressure were found in the EIT group (P < 0.01). Hospital survival rates were 66.7% (16 of 24 patients) in the EIT group and 48.4% (15 of 31) in the control group. Identical rates were found regarding the weaning success rate: 66.7% in the EIT group and 48.4% in the control group.ConclusionIn severe ARDS patients, it was feasible and safe to guide PEEP titration with EIT at the bedside. As compared with pressure-volume curve, the EIT-guided PEEP titration may be associated with improved oxygenation, compliance, driving pressure, and weaning success rate. The findings encourage further randomized control study with a larger sample size and potentially less bias in the baseline data. Trial Registration NCT03112512.

Project description:BackgroundWe hypothesized that as CARDS may present different pathophysiological features than classic ARDS, the application of high levels of end-expiratory pressure is questionable. Our first aim was to investigate the effects of 5-15 cmH2O of PEEP on partitioned respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and dead space; secondly, we investigated whether respiratory system compliance and severity of hypoxemia could affect the response to PEEP on partitioned respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and dead space, dividing the population according to the median value of respiratory system compliance and oxygenation. Thirdly, we explored the effects of an additional PEEP selected according to the Empirical PEEP-FiO2 table of the EPVent-2 study on partitioned respiratory mechanics and gas exchange in a subgroup of patients.MethodsSixty-one paralyzed mechanically ventilated patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled (age 60 [54-67] years, PaO2/FiO2 113 [79-158] mmHg and PEEP 10 [10-10] cmH2O). Keeping constant tidal volume, respiratory rate and oxygen fraction, two PEEP levels (5 and 15 cmH2O) were selected. In a subgroup of patients an additional PEEP level was applied according to an Empirical PEEP-FiO2 table (empirical PEEP). At each PEEP level gas exchange, partitioned lung mechanics and hemodynamic were collected.ResultsAt 15 cmH2O of PEEP the lung elastance, lung stress and mechanical power were higher compared to 5 cmH2O. The PaO2/FiO2, arterial carbon dioxide and ventilatory ratio increased at 15 cmH2O of PEEP. The arterial-venous oxygen difference and central venous saturation were higher at 15 cmH2O of PEEP. Both the mechanics and gas exchange variables significantly increased although with high heterogeneity. By increasing the PEEP from 5 to 15 cmH2O, the changes in partitioned respiratory mechanics and mechanical power were not related to hypoxemia or respiratory compliance. The empirical PEEP was 18 ± 1 cmH2O. The empirical PEEP significantly increased the PaO2/FiO2 but also driving pressure, lung elastance, lung stress and mechanical power compared to 15 cmH2O of PEEP.ConclusionsIn COVID-19 ARDS during the early phase the effects of raising PEEP are highly variable and cannot easily be predicted by respiratory system characteristics, because of the heterogeneity of the disease.

Project description:PurposeRecruitment of lung volume is often cited as the reason for using positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. We performed a systematic review on PEEP-induced recruited lung volume measured from inspiratory volume-pressure (VP) curves in ARDS patients to assess the prevalence of patients with PEEP-induced recruited lung volume and the mortality in recruiters and non-recruiters.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of PubMed to identify studies including ARDS patients in which the intervention of an increase in PEEP was accompanied by measurement of the recruited volume (Vrec increase versus no increase) using the VP curve in order to assess the relation between Vrec and mortality at ICU discharge. We first analysed the pooled data from the papers identified and then analysed individual patient level data received from the authors via personal contact. The risk of bias of the included papers was assessed using the quality in prognosis studies tool and the certainty of the evidence regarding the relationship of mortality to Vrec by the GRADE approach. Recruiters were defined as patients with a Vrec > 150 ml. A random effects model was used for the pooled data. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used for individual patient data.ResultsWe identified 16 papers with a total of 308 patients for the pooled data meta-analysis and 14 papers with a total of 384 patients for the individual data analysis. The quality of the articles was moderate. In the pooled data, the prevalence of recruiters was 74% and the mortality was not significantly different between recruiters and non-recruiters (relative risk 1.20 [95% confidence intervals 0.88-1.63]). The certainty of the evidence regarding this association was very low and publication bias evident. In the individual data, the prevalence of recruiters was 70%. In the multivariable logistic regression, Vrec was not associated with mortality but Simplified Acute Physiology Score II and driving pressure at PEEP of 5 cmH2O were.ConclusionAfter a PEEP increment, most patients are recruiters. Vrec was not associated with ICU mortality. The presence of similar findings in the individual patient level analysis and the driving pressure at PEEP of 5 cmH2O was associated with mortality as previously reported validate our findings. Publication bias and the lack of prospective studies suggest more research is required.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) ventilation and the optimization of PEEP titration in COVID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) continues to be a subject of debate. In this systematic review, we investigated the effects of varying PEEP settings on patients with severe ARDS primarily resulting from COVID-19 (C-ARDS).ObjectivesDoes higher or lower PEEP improve the outcomes in COVID-19 ARDS? Does individually titrated PEEP lead to better outcomes compared with PEEP set by standardised (low and high ARDS network PEEP tables) approaches? Does the individually set PEEP (best PEEP) differ from PEEP set according to the standardised approaches (low and high ARDS network PEEP tables)?DesignSystematic review of observational studies without metaanalysis.Data sourcesWe performed an extensive systematic literature search in Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (CCSR), PubMed, Embase.com, Web of Science Core Collection, World Health Organization COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), medRxiv, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until 24/01/2024.Eligibility criteriaVentilated adult patients (≧18 years) with C-ARDS.ResultsWe screened 16 026 records, evaluated 119 full texts, and included 12 studies (n = 1431 patients) in our final data synthesis, none of them being a randomised controlled trial. The heterogeneity of study procedures and populations did not allow conduction of a meta-analysis. The results of those studies that compared lower and higher PEEP strategies in C-ARDS were ambiguous pointing out either positive effects on oxygenation with high levels of PEEP, or negative changes in lung mechanics.ConclusionThe available evidence does not provide sufficient guidance for recommendations on optimal PEEP settings in C-ARDS. In general, well designed platform studies are needed to answer the questions raised in this review and, in particular, to investigate the use of individualised PEEP titration techniques and the inclusion of patients with different ARDS entities, severities and disease stages.Title registrationOur systematic review protocol was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO 2021: CRD42021260303).

Dataset Information

Comparison of the effects of open and closed aspiration on end-expiratory lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Comparison of the effects of open and closed aspiration on end-expiratory lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets