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:RationalePatients with coronavirus disease-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (C-ARDS) could have a specific physiological phenotype as compared with those affected by ARDS from other causes (NC-ARDS).ObjectivesTo describe the effect of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on respiratory mechanics in C-ARDS patients in supine and prone position, and as compared to NC-ARDS. The primary endpoint was the best PEEP defined as the smallest sum of hyperdistension and collapse.MethodsSeventeen patients with moderate-to-severe C-ARDS were monitored by electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and evaluated during PEEP titration in supine (n = 17) and prone (n = 14) position and compared with 13 NC-ARDS patients investigated by EIT in our department before the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsAs compared with NC-ARDS, C-ARDS exhibited a higher median best PEEP (defined using EIT as the smallest sum of hyperdistension and collapse, 12 [9, 12] vs. 9 [6, 9] cmH2O, p < 0.01), more collapse at low PEEP, and less hyperdistension at high PEEP. The median value of the best PEEP was similar in C-ARDS in supine and prone position: 12 [9, 12] vs. 12 [10, 15] cmH2O, p = 0.59. The response to PEEP was also similar in C-ARDS patients with higher vs. lower respiratory system compliance.ConclusionAn intermediate PEEP level seems appropriate in half of our C-ARDS patients. There is no solid evidence that compliance at low PEEP could predict the response to PEEP.
Project description:BackgroundIndividualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) by electrical impedance tomography (EIT) has potential interest in the optimization of ventilation distribution in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The aim of the study was to determine whether early individualized titration of PEEP with EIT improved outcomes in patients with ARDS.MethodsA total of 117 ARDS patients receiving mechanical ventilation were randomly assigned to EIT group (n = 61, PEEP adjusted based on ventilation distribution) or control group (n = 56, low PEEP/FiO2 table). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Secondary and exploratory outcomes were ventilator-free days, length of ICU stay, incidence of pneumothorax and barotrauma, and difference in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at day 1 (ΔD1-SOFA) and day 2 (ΔD2-SOFA) compared with baseline.Measurements and main resultsThere was no statistical difference in the value of PEEP between the EIT group and control group, but the combination of PEEP and FiO2 was different between groups. In the control group, a significantly positive correlation was found between the PEEP value and the corresponding FiO2 (r = 0.47, p < 0.00001) since a given matched table was used for PEEP settings. Diverse combinations of PEEP and FiO2 were found in the EIT group (r = 0.05, p = 0.68). There was no significant difference in mortality rate (21% vs. 27%, EIT vs. control, p = 0.63), ICU length of stay (13.0 (7.0, 25.0) vs 10.0 (7.0, 14.8), median (25th-75th percentile); p = 0.17), and ventilator-free days at day 28 (14.0 (2.0, 23.0) vs 19.0 (0.0, 24.0), p = 0.55) between the two groups. The incidence of new barotrauma was zero. Compared with control group, significantly lower ΔD1-SOFA and ΔD2-SOFA were found in the EIT group (p < 0.001) in a post hoc comparison. Moreover, the EIT group exhibited a significant decrease of SOFA at day 2 compared with baseline (paired t-test, difference by - 1 (- 3.5, 0), p = 0.001). However, the control group did show a similar decrease (difference by 1 (- 2, 2), p = 0.131).ConclusionOur study showed a 6% absolute decrease in mortality in the EIT group: a statistically non-significant, but clinically non-negligible result. This result along with the showed improvement in organ function might justify further reserach to validate the beneficial effect of individualized EIT-guided PEEP setting on clinical outcomes of patients with ARDS.Trial registrationClinicalTrials, NCT02361398. Registered 11 February 2015-prospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02361398 .
Project description:Lung recruitment maneuvers followed by an individually titrated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) are the key components of the open lung ventilation strategy in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The staircase recruitment maneuver is a step-by-step increase in PEEP followed by a decremental PEEP trial. The duration of each step is usually 2 minutes without physiologic rationale.In this prospective study, we measured the dynamic end-expiratory lung volume changes (?EELV) during an increase and decrease in PEEP to determine the optimal duration for each step. PEEP was progressively increased from 5 to 40 cmH2O and then decreased from 40 to 5 cmH2O in steps of 5 cmH2O every 2.5 minutes. The dynamic of ?EELV was measured by direct spirometry as the difference between inspiratory and expiratory tidal volumes over 2.5 minutes following each increase and decrease in PEEP. ?EELV was separated between the expected increased volume, calculated as the product of the respiratory system compliance by the change in PEEP, and the additional volume.Twenty-six early onset moderate or severe ARDS patients were included. Data are expressed as median [25th-75th quartiles]. During the increase in PEEP, the expected increased volume was achieved within 2[2-2] breaths. During the decrease in PEEP, the expected decreased volume was achieved within 1 [1-1] breath, and 95 % of the additional decreased volume was achieved within 8 [2-15] breaths. Completion of volume changes in 99 % of both increase and decrease in PEEP events required 29 breaths.In early ARDS, most of the ?EELV occurs within the first minute, and change is completed within 2 minutes, following an increase or decrease in PEEP.
Project description:Prone position can reduce mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but several studies found variable effects on oxygenation and lung mechanics. It is unclear whether different positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration techniques modify the effect of prone position. We tested, in an animal model of ARDS, if the PEEP titration method may influence the effect of prone position on oxygenation and lung protection. In a crossover study in 10 piglets with a two-hit injury ARDS model, we set the "best PEEP" according to the ARDS Network low-PEEP table (BPARDS) or targeting the lowest transpulmonary driving pressure (BPDPL). We measured gas exchange, lung mechanics, aeration, ventilation, and perfusion with computed tomography (CT) and electrical impedance tomography in each position with both PEEP titration techniques. The primary endpoint was the PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Secondary outcomes were lung mechanics, regional distribution of ventilation, regional distribution of perfusion, and homogeneity of strain derived by CT scan. The PaO2/FiO2 ratio increased in prone position when PEEP was set with BPARDS [difference 54 (19-106) mmHg, p = 0.04] but not with BPDPL [difference 17 (-24 to 68) mmHg, p = 0.99]. The transpulmonary driving pressure significantly decreased during prone position with both BPARDS [difference -0.9 (-1.5 to -0.9) cmH2O, p = 0.009] and BPDPL [difference -0.55 (-1.6 to -0.4) cmH2O, p = 0.04]. Pronation homogenized lung regional strain and ventilation and redistributed the ventilation/perfusion ratio along the sternal-to-vertebral gradient. The PEEP titration technique influences the oxygenation response to prone position. However, the lung-protective effects of prone position could be independent of the PEEP titration strategy.
Project description:Interventions: A group:Intervention: The PEEP incremental method for lung recruitment starts with PEEP 5 cmH2O, increasing PEEP 5 cmH2O every 5 breaths until PEEP reaches 20cmH2O and maintaining breathing 10 times. Then decrease PEEP to 5 cmH2O by the reversed operation. After lung recruitment, PEEP titration was performed. PEEP gradually decreased from 20 cmH2O to 4 cmH2O, and decreased by 2 cmH2O every 5 breaths. The PEEP value corresponding to the lowest driving pressure was the optimal PEEP value. The method of lung recruitment is the same as before every 1 hour in the future.;Bgroup:Intervention: The PEEP incremental method of lung recruitment starts with PEEP 5 cmH2O and increases PEEP 5cmH2O every 5 breaths until PEEP reaches 20 cmH2O and maintains breathing for 10 times. Then reverse the operation to decrease PEEP to 5 cmH2O. After lung recruitment, PEEP titration was performed. PEEP gradually decreased from 20 cmH2O to 4 cmH2O, and decreased by 2cmH2O every 5 breaths. The PEEP value corresponding to the lowest driving pressure was the optimal PEEP value. No lung recruitment in the future.;C group:Constant 5cmH2O PEEP
Primary outcome(s): global impedance curve amplitude
Study Design: Parallel
Project description:BackgroundIndividualised bedside adjustment of mechanical ventilation is a standard strategy in acute coma neurocritical care patients. This involves customising positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), which could improve ventilation homogeneity and arterial oxygenation. This study aimed to determine whether PEEP titrated by electrical impedance tomography (EIT) results in different lung ventilation homogeneity when compared to standard PEEP of 5 cmH2O in mechanically ventilated patients with healthy lungs.MethodsIn this prospective single-centre study, we evaluated 55 acute adult neurocritical care patients starting controlled ventilation with PEEPs close to 5 cmH2O. Next, the optimal PEEP was identified by EIT-guided decremental PEEP titration, probing PEEP levels between 9 and 2 cmH2O and finding the minimal amount of collapse and overdistension. EIT-derived parameters of ventilation homogeneity were evaluated before and after the PEEP titration and after the adjustment of PEEP to its optimal value. Non-EIT-based parameters, such as peripheral capillary Hb saturation (SpO2) and end-tidal pressure of CO2, were recorded hourly and analysed before PEEP titration and after PEEP adjustment.ResultsThe mean PEEP value before titration was 4.75 ± 0.94 cmH2O (ranging from 3 to max 8 cmH2O), 4.29 ± 1.24 cmH2O after titration and before PEEP adjustment, and 4.26 ± 1.5 cmH2O after PEEP adjustment. No statistically significant differences in ventilation homogeneity were observed due to the adjustment of PEEP found by PEEP titration. We also found non-significant changes in non-EIT-based parameters following the PEEP titration and subsequent PEEP adjustment, except for the mean arterial pressure, which dropped statistically significantly (with a mean difference of 3.2 mmHg, 95% CI 0.45 to 6.0 cmH2O, p < 0.001).ConclusionAdjusting PEEP to values derived from PEEP titration guided by EIT does not provide any significant changes in ventilation homogeneity as assessed by EIT to ventilated patients with healthy lungs, provided the change in PEEP does not exceed three cmH2O. Thus, a reduction in PEEP determined through PEEP titration that is not greater than 3 cmH2O from an initial value of 5 cmH2O is unlikely to affect ventilation homogeneity significantly, which could benefit mechanically ventilated neurocritical care patients.
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:BackgroundHigh positive end-expiratory pressures (PEEP) may induce overdistension/recruitment and affect ventilation-perfusion matching (VQMatch) in mechanically ventilated patients. This study aimed to investigate the association between PEEP-induced lung overdistension/recruitment and VQMatch by electrical impedance tomography (EIT).MethodsThe study was conducted prospectively on 30 adult mechanically ventilated patients: 18/30 with ARDS and 12/30 with high risk for ARDS. EIT measurements were performed at zero end-expiratory pressures (ZEEP) and subsequently at high (12-15 cmH2O) PEEP. The number of overdistended pixels over the number of recruited pixels (O/R ratio) was calculated, and the patients were divided into low O/R (O/R ratio < 15%) and high O/R groups (O/R ratio ≥ 15%). The global inhomogeneity (GI) index was calculated to evaluate the ventilation distribution. Lung perfusion image was calculated from the EIT impedance-time curves caused by 10 ml 10% NaCl injection during a respiratory pause (> 8 s). DeadSpace%, Shunt%, and VQMatch% were calculated based on lung EIT perfusion and ventilation images.ResultsIncreasing PEEP resulted in recruitment mainly in dorsal regions and overdistension mainly in ventral regions. ΔVQMatch% (VQMatch% at high PEEP minus that at ZEEP) was significantly correlated with recruited pixels (r = 0.468, P = 0.009), overdistended pixels (r = - 0.666, P < 0.001), O/R ratio (r = - 0.686, P < 0.001), and ΔSpO2 (r = 0.440, P = 0.015). Patients in the low O/R ratio group (14/30) had significantly higher Shunt% and lower VQMatch% than those in the high O/R ratio group (16/30) at ZEEP but not at high PEEP. Comparable DeadSpace% was found in both groups. A high PEEP caused a significant improvement of VQMatch%, DeadSpace%, Shunt%, and GI in the low O/R ratio group, but not in the high O/R ratio group. Using O/R ratio of 15% resulted in a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 100% for an increase of VQMatch% > 20% in response to high PEEP.ConclusionsChange of ventilation-perfusion matching was associated with regional overdistention and recruitment induced by PEEP. A low O/R ratio induced by high PEEP might indicate a more homogeneous ventilation and improvement of VQMatch.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04081155 . Registered on 9 September 2019-retrospectively registered.
Project description:BackgroundElectrical impedance tomography (EIT) has been shown to be useful in guiding individual positive end-expiratory pressure titration for patients with mechanical ventilation. However, the appropriate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level and whether the individualized PEEP needs to be adjusted during long-term surgery (>6 h) were unknown. Meanwhile, the effect of individualized PEEP on the distribution of pulmonary ventilation in patients who receive abdominal thermoperfusion chemotherapy is unknown. The primary aim of this study was to observe the effect of EIT-guided PEEP on the distribution of pulmonary ventilation in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hot intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The secondary aim was to analyze their effect on postoperative pulmonary complications.MethodsA total of 48 patients were recruited and randomly divided into two groups, with 24 patients in each group. For the control group (group A), PEEP was set at 5 cm H2O, while in the EIT group (group B), individual PEEP was titrated and adjusted every 2 h with EIT guidance. Ventilation distribution, respiratory/circulation parameters, and PPC incidence were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe average individualized PEEP was 10.3 ± 1.5 cm H2O, 10.2 ± 1.6 cm H2O, 10.1 ± 1.8 cm H2O, and 9.7 ± 2.1 cm H2O at 5 min, 2 h, 4 h, and 6 h after tracheal intubation during CRS + HIPEC. Individualized PEEP was correlated with ventilation distribution in the regions of interest (ROI) 1 and ROI 3 at 4 h mechanical ventilation and ROI 1 at 6 h mechanical ventilation. The ventilation distribution under individualized PEEP was back-shifted for 6 h but moved to the control group's ventral side under PEEP 5 cm H2O. The respiratory and circulatory function indicators were both acceptable either under individualized PEEP or PEEP 5 cm H2O. The incidence of total PPCs was significantly lower under individualized PEEP (66.7%) than PEEP 5 cm H2O (37.5%) for patients with CRS + HIPEC.ConclusionThe appropriate individualized PEEP was stable at approximately 10 cm H2O during 6 h for patients with CRS + HIPEC, along with better ventilation distribution and a lower total PPC incidence than the fixed PEEP of 5 cm H2O.Clinical trial registration: identifier ChiCTR1900023897.