Targeting Driving Pressure for the Management of ARDS…Isn't It Just Very Low Tidal Volume Ventilation?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hirshberg EL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7193815 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo determine whether tidal volume/predicted body weight (TV/PBW) or driving pressure (DP) are associated with mortality in a heterogeneous population of hypoxic mechanically ventilated patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study involving 18 intensive care units included consecutive patients ≥18 years old, receiving mechanical ventilation for ≥3 days, with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤300 mmHg, whether or not they met full criteria for ARDS. The main outcome was hospital mortality. Multiple logistic regression (MLR) incorporated TV/PBW, DP, and potential confounders including age, APACHE IVa® predicted hospital mortality, respiratory system compliance (CRS), and PaO2/FiO2. Predetermined strata of TV/PBW were compared using MLR.ResultsOur cohort comprised 5,167 patients with mean age 61.9 years, APACHE IVa® score 79.3, PaO2/FiO2 166 mmHg and CRS 40.5 ml/cm H2O. Regression analysis revealed that patients receiving DP one standard deviation above the mean or higher (≥19 cmH20) had an adjusted odds ratio for mortality (ORmort) = 1.10 (95% CI: 1.06-1.13, p = 0.009). Regression analysis showed a U-shaped relationship between strata of TV/PBW and adjusted mortality. Using TV/PBW 4-6 ml/kg as the referent group, patients receiving >10 ml/kg had similar adjusted ORmort, but those receiving 6-7, 7-8 and 8-10 ml/kg had lower adjusted ORmort (95%CI) of 0.81 (0.65-1.00), 0.78 (0.63-0.97) and 0.80 0.67-1.01) respectively. The adjusted ORmort in patients receiving 4-6 ml/kg was 1.26 (95%CI: 1.04-1.52) compared to patients receiving 6-10 ml/kg.ConclusionsDriving pressures ≥19 cmH2O were associated with increased adjusted mortality. TV/PBW 4-6ml/kg were used in less than 15% of patients and associated with increased adjusted mortality compared to TV/PBW 6-10 ml/kg used in 82% of patients. Prospective clinical trials are needed to prove whether limiting DP or the use of TV/PBW 6-10 ml/kg versus 4-6 ml/kg benefits mortality.
| S-EPMC8351937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary blast lung injury (PBLI) presents as a syndrome of respiratory distress and haemoptysis resulting from explosive shock wave exposure and is a frequent cause of mortality and morbidity in both military conflicts and terrorist attacks. The optimal mode of mechanical ventilation for managing PBLI is not currently known, and clinical trials in humans are impossible due to the sporadic and violent nature of the disease. METHODS:A high-fidelity multi-organ computational simulator of PBLI pathophysiology was configured to replicate data from 14 PBLI casualties from the conflict in Afghanistan. Adaptive and responsive ventilatory protocols implementing low tidal volume (LTV) ventilation and airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) were applied to each simulated patient for 24 h, allowing direct quantitative comparison of their effects on gas exchange, ventilatory parameters, haemodynamics, extravascular lung water and indices of ventilator-induced lung injury. RESULTS:The simulated patients responded well to both ventilation strategies. Post 24-h investigation period, the APRV arm had similar PF ratios (137 mmHg vs 157 mmHg), lower sub-injury threshold levels of mechanical power (11.9 J/min vs 20.7 J/min) and lower levels of extravascular lung water (501 ml vs 600 ml) compared to conventional LTV. Driving pressure was higher in the APRV group (11.9 cmH2O vs 8.6 cmH2O), but still significantly less than levels associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Appropriate use of APRV may offer casualties with PBLI important mortality-related benefits and should be considered for management of this challenging patient group.
| S-EPMC7309205 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesLow tidal volume (= tidal volume ≤ 6 mL/kg, predicted body weight) ventilation using volume control benefits patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Airway pressure release ventilation is an alternative to low tidal volume-volume control ventilation, but the release breaths generated are variable and can exceed tidal volume breaths of low tidal volume-volume control. We evaluate the application of a low tidal volume-compatible airway pressure release ventilation protocol that manages release volumes on both clinical and feasibility endpoints.DesignWe designed a prospective randomized trial in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. We randomized patients to low tidal volume-volume control, low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation, and traditional airway pressure release ventilation with a planned enrollment of 246 patients. The study was stopped early because of low enrollment and inability to consistently achieve tidal volumes less than 6.5 mL/kg in the low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation arm. Although the primary clinical study endpoint was PaO2/FIO2 on study day 3, we highlight the feasibility outcomes related to tidal volumes in both arms.SettingFour Intermountain Healthcare tertiary ICUs.PatientsAdult ICU patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation.InterventionsLow tidal volume-volume control, airway pressure release ventilation, and low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation.Measurements and main resultsWe observed wide variability and higher tidal (release for airway pressure release ventilation) volumes in both airway pressure release ventilation (8.6 mL/kg; 95% CI, 7.8-9.6) and low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation (8.0; 95% CI, 7.3-8.9) than volume control (6.8; 95% CI, 6.2-7.5; p = 0.005) with no difference between airway pressure release ventilation and low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation (p = 0.58). Recognizing the limitations of small sample size, we observed no difference in 52 patients in day 3 PaO2/ FIO2 (p = 0.92). We also observed no significant difference between arms in sedation, vasoactive medications, or occurrence of pneumothorax.ConclusionsAirway pressure release ventilation resulted in release volumes often exceeding 12 mL/kg despite a protocol designed to target low tidal volume ventilation. Current airway pressure release ventilation protocols are unable to achieve consistent and reproducible delivery of low tidal volume ventilation goals. A large-scale efficacy trial of low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation is not feasible at this time in the absence of an explicit, generalizable, and reproducible low tidal volume-airway pressure release ventilation protocol.
| S-EPMC6250244 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:We observed that increasing fresh gas flow (FGF) decreased exhaled tidal volume (VT) during pressure control ventilation (PCV). A literature search produced no such description whereby unintended VT changes occur with FGF changes during PCV. METHODS:To model an infant's lungs, 1 lung of a mechanical lung model (Dual Adult TTL 1600; Michigan Instruments, Inc, Grand Rapids, MI) was set at a compliance of 0.0068 L/cm H2O. An Rp50 resistor (27.2 cm H2O/L/s at 15 L/min) simulated normal bronchial resistance. The simulated lung was connected to a pediatric breathing circuit via a 3.5-mm cuffed endotracheal tube. A ventilator with PCV capability (Model 7900; Aestiva, GE Healthcare, Madison, WI) measured exhaled VT, and a flow monitor (NICO; Respironics, Murraysville, PA) measured peak inspiratory flow, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and peak inspiratory pressure. In PCV mode, exhaled VT displayed by the ventilator at FGF rates of 1, 6, 10, and 15 L/min was manually recorded across multiple ventilator settings. This protocol was repeated for the Avance CS2 anesthesia machine (GE Healthcare). RESULTS:For the Aestiva, higher FGF rates in PCV mode decreased exhaled VT. Exhaled VT for FGFs of 1, 6, 10, and 15 L/min were on average 48, 34.9, 16.5, and 10 mL, respectively, at ventilator settings of inspiratory pressure of 10 cm H2O, PEEP of 0 cm H2O, and respiratory rate of 20 breaths/min. This is a decrease by up to 27%, 65.6%, and 79.2% when FGFs of 6, 10, and 15 L/min are compared with a FGF of 1 L/min, respectively. In the GE Avance CS2 at the same ventilator settings, VT for FGF rates of 1, 6, 10, and 15 L/min were on average 46, 43, 40.4, and 39.7 mL, respectively. The FGF effect on VT was not as pronounced with the GE Avance CS2 as with the GE Aestiva. CONCLUSIONS:FGF has a significant effect on VT during PCV in the Aestiva bellows ventilator, suggesting caution when changing FGF during PCV in infants. Our hypothesis is that at higher FGF rates, an inadvertent PEEP is developed by the flow resistance of the ventilator relief valve that is not recognized by the ventilator. In turn, less change in pressure is needed to reach the set inspiratory pressure, resulting in lower VT delivery at higher FGF rates. This underappreciated FGF-VT interaction during PCV with a bellows ventilator may be clinically significant in pediatric patients; prospective data collection in patients is needed for further evaluation.
| S-EPMC6774243 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMechanical ventilation (MV) is essential in the management of critically ill neonates, especially preterm infants. However, inappropriate or prolonged use of invasive MV may result in ventilator-associated lung injury. A systemic review comparing pressure control ventilation (PCV) with volume-targeted ventilation mode (VTV) approved that VTV reduces the incidence of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in neonates; however, this study did not analyze subgroups of very low birthweight (VLBW) infants. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the use of VTV and PCV in VLBW infants and to provide clinical evidence for reducing mortality and complications of MV in VLBW infants.MethodA single-center randomized controlled trial will be performed. All eligible infants will be randomized and assigned to either VTV or PCV group with 1:1 ratio using sealed envelopes. Death or BPD at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age will be used as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include BPD, death, length of invasive MV, noninvasive mechanical ventilation, and oxygen use, length of hospital stay, failure of conventional MV, rate of using high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) as rescue therapy, rate of reintubation within 48 h, and hospital expenses.DiscussionSystemic review suggested that VTV decreases the incidence of death or BPD in neonates compared to PLV; however, this study did not specifically analyze subgroups of VLBW infants. We designed this single-center randomized controlled trials (RCT) to add a significant contribution regarding the benefits of VTV for VLBW patients.
| S-EPMC10428577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: The ideal ventilation strategy for patients with massive brain damage requires better elucidation. We hypothesized that in the presence of massive brain injury, a ventilation strategy using low (6 mL/kg) tidal volume (VT) ventilation with open lung positive end-expiratory pressure set according to the minimal static elastance of the respiratory system (LVT/OLPEEP), attenuate the impact of massive brain damage on gas-exchange, respiratory mechanics, lung histology and whole genome alterations compared with high (12 mL/kg) VT and low PEEP ventilation (HVT/LPEEP). Methods: Twenty-eight adult male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to one of four groups: 1) no brain damage (NBD) with LVT/OLPEEP; 2) NBD with HVT/LPEEP; 3) brain damage (BD) with LVT/OLPEEP; and 4) BD with HVT/LPEEP. All animals were mechanically ventilated for six hours. Brain damage was induced by an inflated balloon catheter into the epidural space. Hemodynamics was recorded and blood gas analysis was performed hourly. At the end of the experiment, respiratory system mechanics and lung histology were analysed. Whole genome analysis was performed using Affimetrix gene chips and confirmatory real-time PCR. Results: In NBD, both LVT/OLPEEP and HVT/LPEEP did not affect arterial blood gases, as well as whole genome expression changes and real-time PCR. In BD, LVT/OLPEEP, compared to HVT/LPEEP, reduced lung damage according to histology, genome analysis and real-time PCR with decreased interleukin (IL-6), cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant (CINC)-1 and angiopoietin-4 expressions. LVT/OLPEEP compared to HVT/LPEEP improved overall survival. Conclusions: In BD, LVT/OLPEEP minimizes lung morpho-functional changes and inflammation compared to HVT/LPEEP. LVT/OLPEEP might represent a suitable ventilatory strategy in massive brain damage.
2014-04-24 | GSE52142 | GEO
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Low tidal volume ventilation lowers mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Previous studies reported poor low tidal volume ventilation implementation. We sought to determine the rate, quality, and predictors of low tidal volume ventilation use. DESIGN:Retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING:One academic and three community hospitals in the Chicago region. PATIENTS:A total of 362 adults meeting the Berlin Definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome consecutively admitted between June and December 2013. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Seventy patients (19.3%) were treated with low tidal volume ventilation (tidal volume < 6.5?mL/kg predicted body weight) at some time during mechanical ventilation. In total, 22.2% of patients requiring an FIO2 greater than 40% and 37.3% of patients with FIO2 greater than 40% and plateau pressure greater than 30?cm H2O received low tidal volume ventilation. The entire cohort received low tidal volume ventilation 11.4% of the time patients had acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among patients who received low tidal volume ventilation, the mean (SD) percentage of acute respiratory distress syndrome time it was used was 59.1% (38.2%), and 34% waited more than 72 hours prior to low tidal volume ventilation initiation. Women were less likely to receive low tidal volume ventilation, whereas sepsis and FIO2 greater than 40% were associated with increased odds of low tidal volume ventilation use. Four attending physicians (6.2%) initiated low tidal volume ventilation within 1 day of acute respiratory distress syndrome onset for greater than or equal to 50% of their patients, whereas 34 physicians (52.3%) never initiated low tidal volume ventilation within 1 day of acute respiratory distress syndrome onset. In total, 54.4% of patients received a tidal volume less than 8?mL/kg predicted body weight, and the mean tidal volume during the first 72 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome onset was never less than 8?mL/kg predicted body weight. CONCLUSIONS:More than 12 years after publication of the landmark low tidal volume ventilation study, use remains poor. Interventions that improve adoption of low tidal volume ventilation are needed.
| S-EPMC4949102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Driving pressure (?Prs) across the respiratory system is suggested as the strongest predictor of hospital mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We wonder whether this result is related to the range of tidal volume (VT). Therefore, we investigated ?Prs in two trials in which strict lung-protective mechanical ventilation was applied in ARDS. Our working hypothesis was that ?Prs is a risk factor for mortality just like compliance (Crs) or plateau pressure (Pplat,rs) of the respiratory system.We performed secondary analysis of data from 787 ARDS patients enrolled in two independent randomized controlled trials evaluating distinct adjunctive techniques while they were ventilated as in the low VT arm of the ARDSnet trial. For this study, we used VT, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), Pplat,rs, Crs, ?Prs, and respiratory rate recorded 24 hours after randomization, and compared them between survivors and nonsurvivors at day 90. Patients were followed for 90 days after inclusion. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used for mortality at day 90. If colinearity between ?Prs, Crs, and Pplat,rs was verified, specific Cox models were used for each of them.Both trials enrolled 805 patients of whom 787 had day-1 data available, and 533 of these survived. In the univariate analysis, ?Prs averaged 13.7?±?3.7 and 12.8?±?3.7 cmH2O (P?=?0.002) in nonsurvivors and survivors, respectively. Colinearity between ?Prs, Crs and Pplat,rs, which was expected as these variables are mathematically coupled, was statistically significant. Hazard ratios from the Cox models for day-90 mortality were 1.05 (1.02-1.08) (P?=?0.005), 1.05 (1.01-1.08) (P?=?0.008) and 0.985 (0.972-0.985) (P?=?0.029) for ?Prs, Pplat,rs and Crs, respectively. PEEP and VT were not associated with death in any model.When ventilating patients with low VT, ?Prs is a risk factor for death in ARDS patients, as is Pplat,rs or Crs. As our data originated from trials from which most ARDS patients were excluded due to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, these findings must be validated in independent observational studies in patients ventilated with a lung protective strategy.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00299650 . Registered 6 March 2006 for the Acurasys trial. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00527813 . Registered 10 September 2007 for the Proseva trial.
| S-EPMC5126997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To compare the effect on the recovery of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) of early endotracheal intubation (ETI) versus bag-mask ventilation (BMV), and expiratory real-time tidal volume (VTe) feedback (TVF) ventilation versus without feedback or standard ventilation (SV) in a pediatric animal model of asphyxial cardiac arrest. Piglets were randomized into five groups: 1: ETI and TVF ventilation (10 ml/kg); 2: ETI and TVF (7 ml/kg); 3: ETI and SV; 4: BMV and TVF (10 ml/kg) and 5: BMV and SV. Thirty breaths-per-minute guided by metronome were given. ROSC, pCO2, pO2, EtCO2 and VTe were compared among groups. Seventy-nine piglets (11.3 ± 1.2 kg) were included. Twenty-six (32.9%) achieved ROSC. Survival was non-significantly higher in ETI (40.4%) than BMV groups (21.9%), p = 0.08. No differences in ROSC were found between TVF and SV groups (30.0% versus 34.7%, p = 0.67). ETI groups presented lower pCO2, and higher pO2, EtCO2 and VTe than BMV groups (p < 0.05). VTe was lower in TVF than in SV groups and in BMV than in ETI groups (p < 0.05). Groups 1 and 3 showed higher pO2 and lower pCO2 over time, although with hyperventilation values (pCO2 < 35 mmHg). ETI groups had non significantly higher survival rate than BMV groups. Compared to BMV groups, ETI groups achieved better oxygenation and ventilation parameters. VTe was lower in both TVF and BMV groups. Hyperventilation was observed in intubated animals with SV and with 10 ml/kg VTF.
| S-EPMC8352976 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung-protective ventilation strategy suggests the use of low tidal volume, depending on ideal body weight, and adequate levels of PEEP. However, reducing tidal volume according to ideal body weight does not always prevent overstress and overstrain. On the contrary, titrating mechanical ventilation on airway driving pressure, computed as airway pressure changes from PEEP to end-inspiratory plateau pressure, equivalent to the ratio between the tidal volume and compliance of respiratory system, should better reflect lung injury. However, possible changes in chest wall elastance could affect the reliability of airway driving pressure. The aim of this study was to evaluate if airway driving pressure could accurately predict lung stress (the pressure generated into the lung due to PEEP and tidal volume).One hundred and fifty ARDS patients were enrolled. At 5 and 15 cmH2O of PEEP, lung stress, driving pressure, lung and chest wall elastance were measured.The applied tidal volume (mL/kg of ideal body weight) was not related to lung gas volume (r (2)?=?0.0005 p?=?0.772). Patients were divided according to an airway driving pressure lower and equal/higher than 15 cmH2O (the lower and higher airway driving pressure groups). At both PEEP levels, the higher airway driving pressure group had a significantly higher lung stress, respiratory system and lung elastance compared to the lower airway driving pressure group. Airway driving pressure was significantly related to lung stress (r (2)?=?0.581 p?<?0.0001 and r (2)?=?0.353 p?<?0.0001 at 5 and 15 cmH2O of PEEP). For a lung stress of 24 and 26 cmH2O, the optimal cutoff value for the airway driving pressure were 15.0 cmH2O (ROC AUC 0.85, 95 % CI?=?0.782-0.922); and 16.7 (ROC AUC 0.84, 95 % CI?=?0.742-0.936).Airway driving pressure can detect lung overstress with an acceptable accuracy. However, further studies are needed to establish if these limits could be used for ventilator settings.
| S-EPMC4993008 | biostudies-literature