Dataset Information

Detailed measurements of oesophageal pressure during mechanical ventilation with an advanced high-resolution manometry catheter.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Oesophageal pressure (PES) is used for calculation of lung and chest wall mechanics and transpulmonary pressure during mechanical ventilation. Measurements performed with a balloon catheter are suggested as a basis for setting the ventilator; however, measurements are affected by several factors. High-resolution manometry (HRM) simultaneously measures pressures at every centimetre in the whole oesophagus and thereby provides extended information about oesophageal pressure. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the factors affecting oesophageal pressure using HRM. METHODS:Oesophageal pressure was measured using a high-resolution manometry catheter in 20 mechanically ventilated patients (15 in the ICU and 5 in the OR). Different PEEP levels and different sizes of tidal volume were applied while pressures were measured continuously. In 10 patients, oesophageal pressure was also measured using a conventional balloon catheter for comparison. A retrospective analysis of oesophageal pressure measured with HRM in supine and sitting positions in 17 awake spontaneously breathing patients is also included. RESULTS:HRM showed large variations in end-expiratory PES (PESEE) and tidal changes in PES (?PES) along the oesophagus. Mean intra-individual difference between the minimum and maximum end-expiratory oesophageal pressure (PESEE at baseline PEEP) and tidal variations in oesophageal pressure (?PES at tidal volume 6?ml/kg) recorded by HRM in the different sections of the oesophagus was 23.7 (7.9) cmH2O and 7.6 (3.9) cmH2O respectively. Oesophageal pressures were affected by tidal volume, level of PEEP, part of the oesophagus included and patient positioning. HRM identified simultaneous increases and decreases in PES within a majority of individual patients. Compared to sitting position, supine position increased PESEE (mean difference 12.3 cmH2O), pressure variation within individual patients and cardiac artefacts. The pressure measured with a balloon catheter did not correspond to the average pressure measured with HRM within the same part of the oesophagus. CONCLUSIONS:The intra-individual variability in PESEE and ?PES is substantial, and as a result, the balloon on the conventional catheter is affected by many different pressures along its length. Oesophageal pressures are not only affected by lung and chest wall mechanics but are a complex product of many factors, which is not obvious during conventional measurements. For correct calculations of transpulmonary pressure, factors influencing oesophageal pressures need to be known. HRM, which is available at many hospitals, can be used to increase the knowledge concerning these factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02901158.

SUBMITTER: Persson P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6567527 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Detailed measurements of oesophageal pressure during mechanical ventilation with an advanced high-resolution manometry catheter.

Persson Per P Ahlstrand Rebecca R Gudmundsson Magni M de Leon Alex A Lundin Stefan S

Critical care (London, England) 20190613 1

<h4>Background</h4>Oesophageal pressure (PES) is used for calculation of lung and chest wall mechanics and transpulmonary pressure during mechanical ventilation. Measurements performed with a balloon catheter are suggested as a basis for setting the ventilator; however, measurements are affected by several factors. High-resolution manometry (HRM) simultaneously measures pressures at every centimetre in the whole oesophagus and thereby provides extended information about oesophageal pressure. The ...[more]

PMID: 31196203

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMechanical power (MP) is the energy delivered to the respiratory system over time during mechanical ventilation. Our aim was to compare the currently available methods to calculate MP during volume- and pressure-controlled ventilation, comparing different equations with the geometric reference method, to understand whether the easier to use surrogate formulas were suitable for the everyday clinical practice. This would warrant a more widespread use of mechanical power to promote lung protection.MethodsForty respiratory failure patients, sedated and paralyzed for clinical reasons, were ventilated in volume-controlled ventilation, at two inspiratory flows (30 and 60 L/min), and pressure-controlled ventilation with a similar tidal volume. Mechanical power was computed both with the geometric method, as the area between the inspiratory limb of the airway pressure and the volume, and with two algebraic methods, a comprehensive and a surrogate formula.ResultsThe bias between the MP computed by the geometric method and by the comprehensive algebraic method during volume-controlled ventilation was respectively 0.053 (0.77, - 0.81) J/min and - 0.4 (0.70, - 1.50) J/min at low and high flows (r2 = 0.96 and 0.97, p < 0.01). The MP measured and computed by the two methods were highly correlated (r2 = 0.95 and 0.94, p < 0.01) with a bias of - 0.0074 (0.91, - 0.93) and - 1.0 (0.45, - 2.52) J/min at high-low flows. During pressure-controlled ventilation, the bias between the MP measured and the one calculated with the comprehensive and simplified methods was correlated (r2 = 0.81, 0.94, p < 0.01) with mean differences of - 0.001 (2.05, - 2.05) and - 0.81 (2.11, - 0.48) J/min.ConclusionsBoth for volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation, the surrogate formulas approximate the reference method well enough to warrant their use in the everyday clinical practice. Given that these formulas require nothing more than the variables already displayed by the intensive care ventilator, a more widespread use of mechanical power should be encouraged to promote lung protection against ventilator-induced lung injury.

Project description:Abstract Objectives To evaluate the influence of change of diet composition on esophageal manometry metrics. Methods The data of 43 NERD patients with low (<20 g/day) baseline dietary fiber intake served as a source data. These patients were examined with the use of standard food frequency questionnaire and high-resolution esophageal manometry. Thirty of them received psyllium 5.0 g TID 10 days in addition of their usual diet within registered clinical trial (NCT01882088). The other 13 were found in the database by diagnosis; their data were eligible in case of the presence of repeated high-resolution esophageal manometry examination and dietary assessments at the same time point and if no significant change in diet composition was revealed. The changes were assessed in accordance to Chicago classification 3.0. Non-parametric statistics (Wilcoxon matched pairs test, Mann-Whitney U-test) were used to assess the change in HRM metrics in these groups. Results In those who received psyllium, significant increase of minimal lower esophageal resting pressure at rest and after 10 water swallows was registered: 5.41 ± 10.1 vs 11.3 ± 9.4 mm Hg, P = 0.023 and 14.1 ± 8.0 vs 14.9 ± 6.4 mm Hg, P = 0.008, accordingly. No significant difference was found in the group with no change of diet composition by these parameters. At baseline, ineffective esophageal motility was found in 46.7% patients of the study group and 53.8% in the control group (P = 0.7). Esophageal motility became normal in 71.4% of those who had IEM initially in the study group after 10 days of treatment, and in 14.3% among the controls (P = 0.0135). This type of peristaltic abnormality was found not changed in 28.6% of the study group and in 85.7% among the control group, P = 0.014. New cases of ineffective esophageal motility revealed in 12.5% of the study group and 16.7% among the controls (P = 0.8) Conclusions Change of diet composition by additional quantity of psyllium may result in the improvement of esophageal motility. Funding Sources Federal Research Center of Nutrition and Biotechnology.

Project description:BackgroundSurvival of patients with acute lung injury or the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been improved by ventilation with small tidal volumes and the use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP); however, the optimal level of PEEP has been difficult to determine. In this pilot study, we estimated transpulmonary pressure with the use of esophageal balloon catheters. We reasoned that the use of pleural-pressure measurements, despite the technical limitations to the accuracy of such measurements, would enable us to find a PEEP value that could maintain oxygenation while preventing lung injury due to repeated alveolar collapse or overdistention.MethodsWe randomly assigned patients with acute lung injury or ARDS to undergo mechanical ventilation with PEEP adjusted according to measurements of esophageal pressure (the esophageal-pressure-guided group) or according to the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network standard-of-care recommendations (the control group). The primary end point was improvement in oxygenation. The secondary end points included respiratory-system compliance and patient outcomes.ResultsThe study reached its stopping criterion and was terminated after 61 patients had been enrolled. The ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen at 72 hours was 88 mm Hg higher in the esophageal-pressure-guided group than in the control group (95% confidence interval, 78.1 to 98.3; P=0.002). This effect was persistent over the entire follow-up time (at 24, 48, and 72 hours; P=0.001 by repeated-measures analysis of variance). Respiratory-system compliance was also significantly better at 24, 48, and 72 hours in the esophageal-pressure-guided group (P=0.01 by repeated-measures analysis of variance).ConclusionsAs compared with the current standard of care, a ventilator strategy using esophageal pressures to estimate the transpulmonary pressure significantly improves oxygenation and compliance. Multicenter clinical trials are needed to determine whether this approach should be widely adopted. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00127491.)

Dataset Information

Detailed measurements of oesophageal pressure during mechanical ventilation with an advanced high-resolution manometry catheter.

Publications

Detailed measurements of oesophageal pressure during mechanical ventilation with an advanced high-resolution manometry catheter.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets