Comparison of pressure-controlled ventilation with volume-controlled ventilation during one-lung ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kim KN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5007729 | biostudies-other | 2016
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe appropriate ventilation mode for one-lung ventilation (OLV) in infants undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) remains controversial. Here we investigated the effect of ventilatory mode "pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed" (PCV-VG) on the airway pressures and oxygenation parameters by comparing it with volume-controlled ventilation (VCV).MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of infants aged 2 to 12 months who underwent extratracheal bronchial blockage for OLV in our center between January 2017 and August 2020. The infants were divided into two groups according to the OLV pattern: group G (n=30, receiving PCV-VG) and group V (n=28, receiving VCV). Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), maximum inspiratory pressure (Ppeak), mean airway pressure (Pmean), dynamic compliance (Cdyn), partial arterial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) was measured and compared between these two groups 10 min before OLV (T1), 30 min after the onset of OLV (T2) and 15 min after OLV (T3). The possible occurrence of hypoxemia and hypotension during OLV was monitored.ResultsCompared to group V, group G had significantly higher PaO2and Cdyn (both P<0.05) and significantly lower Ppeak and Pmean (both P<0.05) in T2. However, all indicators did not show significant differences between these two groups at T1 and T3 (all P>0.05). The incidence of hypoxemia was significantly higher in group V than in group G (P<0.05), while the difference in the incidence of hypotension was not statistically significant (P>0.05).ConclusionsMechanical ventilation using the PCV-VG mode is possible in infants when performing OLV during VATS. Compared to VCV, PCV-VG can offer lower Ppeak and Pmean, improve lung compliance, and achieve better oxygenation.
| S-EPMC8578778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We evaluated the effectiveness of pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed (PCV-VG) mode combined with open-lung approach (OLA) in patients during one-lung ventilation (OLV). First, 176 patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery were allocated randomly to four groups: PCV+OLA (45 cases, PCV-VG mode plus OLA involving application of individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) after a recruitment maneuver), PCV (44 cases, PCV-VG mode plus standard lung-protective ventilation with fixed PEEP of 5?cmH2O), VCV+OLA (45 cases, volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) plus OLA), and VCV (42 cases, VCV plus standard lung-protective ventilation). Mean airway pressure (P mean), dynamic compliance (Cdyn), PaO2/FiO2 ratio, intrapulmonary shunt ratio (Qs/Qt), dead space fraction (V D/V T), and plasma concentration of neutrophil elastase were obtained to assess the effects of four lung-protective ventilation strategies. At 45?min after OLV, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) P mean was higher in the PCV+OLA group (13.00 (12.00, 13.00) cmH2O) and the VCV+OLA group (12.00 (12.00, 14.00) cmH2O) than in the PCV group (11.00 (10.00, 12.00) cmH2O) and the VCV group (11.00 (10.00, 12.00) cmH2O) (P < 0.05); the median (IQR) Cdyn was higher in the PCV+OLA group (27.00 (24.00, 32.00) mL/cmH2O) and the VCV+OLA group (27.00 (22.00, 30.00) mL/cmH2O) than in the PCV group (23.00 (21.00, 25.00) mL/cmH2O) and the VCV group (20.00 (18.75, 21.00) mL/cmH2O) (P < 0.05); the median (IQR) Qs/Qt in the PCV+OLA group (0.17 (0.16, 0.19)) was significantly lower than that in the PCV group (0.19 (0.18, 0.20)) and the VCV group (0.19 (0.17, 0.20)) (P < 0.05); V D/V T was lower in the PCV+OLA group (0.18 ± 0.05) and the VCV+OLA group (0.19 ± 0.07) than in the PCV group (0.21 ± 0.07) and the VCV group (0.22 ± 0.06) (P < 0.05). The concentration of neutrophil elastase was lower in the PCV+OLA group than in the PCV, VCV+OLA, and VCV groups at total-lung ventilation 10?min after OLV (162.47 ± 25.71, 198.58 ± 41.99, 200.84 ± 22.17, and 286.95 ± 21.10?ng/mL, resp.) (P < 0.05). In conclusion, PCV-VG mode combined with an OLA strategy leads to favorable effects upon lung mechanics, oxygenation parameters, and the inflammatory response during OLV.
| S-EPMC7206860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are life threatening clinical conditions seen in critically ill patients with diverse underlying illnesses. Lung injury may be perpetuated by ventilation strategies that do not limit lung volumes and airway pressures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pressure and volume-limited (PVL) ventilation strategies with more traditional mechanical ventilation in adults with ALI and ARDS. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We searched Medline, EMBASE, HEALTHSTAR and CENTRAL, related articles on PubMed™, conference proceedings and bibliographies of identified articles for randomized trials comparing PVL ventilation with traditional approaches to ventilation in critically ill adults with ALI and ARDS. Two reviewers independently selected trials, assessed trial quality, and abstracted data. We identified ten trials (n?=?1,749) meeting study inclusion criteria. Tidal volumes achieved in control groups were at the lower end of the traditional range of 10-15 mL/kg. We found a clinically important but borderline statistically significant reduction in hospital mortality with PVL [relative risk (RR) 0.84; 95% CI 0.70, 1.00; p?=?0.05]. This reduction in risk was attenuated (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.74, 1.09, p?=?0.27) in a sensitivity analysis which excluded 2 trials that combined PVL with open-lung strategies and stopped early for benefit. We found no effect of PVL on barotrauma; however, use of paralytic agents increased significantly with PVL (RR 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.82; p?=?0.03). CONCLUSIONS:This systematic review suggests that PVL strategies for mechanical ventilation in ALI and ARDS reduce mortality and are associated with increased use of paralytic agents.
| S-EPMC3030554 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Many studies have investigated a comparison of the potency and safety of PCV versus VCV modes in spinal surgery in prone position. However, controversy about the maximal benefits of which ventilation modes remains. The main purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate which one is the optimal ventilation for surgery patients undergoing spine surgery in prone position between the two ventilation modes as PCV and VCV. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for potentially eligible articles. The continuous outcomes were analyzed using the mean difference and the associated 95% confidence interval. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software. Results Our meta-analysis included 8 RCTs involving a total of 454 patients between 2012 and 2020. The results demonstrated that IOB, Ppeak and CVP for VCV are significantly superior to PCV in spinal surgery in prone position. And PCV had higher Cdyn and PaO2/FiO2 than VCV. But there was no significant difference between PCV and VCV in terms of POB, Hb, HCT, HR and MAP. Conclusions The PCV mode displayed a more satisfying effect than VCV mode. Compared to VCV mode in same preset of tidal volume, the patients with PCV mode in prone position demonstrated less IOB, lower Ppeak and CVP, and higher PaO2/FiO2 in spinal surgery. However, there is no obvious difference between PCV and VCV in terms of hemodynamics variables (HR and MAP). Highlights • The PCV mode displayed a more satisfying effect than VCV mode.• Compared to VCV mode, the patients with PCV mode in prone position demonstrated less IOB, lower Ppeak and CVP, and higher PaO2/FiO2 in spinal surgery.• There is no obvious difference between PCV and VCV in terms of hemodynamics variables.
| S-EPMC9207057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Managing ventilation and oxygenation during laparoscopic procedures in severely obese patients undergoing weight loss surgery presents many challenges. Pressure-controlled ventilation, volume-guaranteed (PCV-VG) is a dual-control mode of ventilation and an alternative to pressure (PC) or volume (VC) controlled ventilation. PCV-VG features a user-selected tidal volume target, that is auto-regulated and pressure controlled. We hypothesized that PCV-VG ventilation would provide improved oxygenation and ventilation during laparoscopic bariatric surgery with a lower peak inflating pressure (PIP) than either PC or VC ventilation. METHODS:This was a prospective cross-over cohort trial (n = 20). In random sequence each patient received the three modes of ventilation for 20 minutes during the laparoscopic portion of the procedure. For all modes of ventilation the goal tidal volume was 6-8 mL/kg, and the respiratory rate was adjusted to achieve normocarbia. The PIP, exhaled tidal volume, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation were recorded every five minutes. At the end of 20 minutes, an arterial blood gas was obtained. Data were analyzed using a paired t-test. RESULTS:PCV-VG and PC ventilation both resulted in significantly lower PIP (cmH2O) than VC ventilation (30.5 ± 3.0, 31.6 ± 4.9, and 36.3 ± 3.4 mmHg respectively; p < 0.01 for PCV-VG vs. VC and PC vs. VC). There was no difference in oxygenation (PaO2), ventilation (PaCO2) or hemodynamic variables between the three ventilation modes. CONCLUSIONS:In adolescents and young adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, PCV-VG and PC were superior to VC ventilation in their ability to provide ventilation with the lowest PIP.
| S-EPMC4161575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One-lung ventilation (OLV), a common ventilation technique, is associated with perioperative lung injury, tightly connected with inflammatory responses. Dexmedetomidine has shown positive anti-inflammatory effects in lung tissues in pre-clinical models. This study investigated the efficacy of dexmedetomidine for suppressing inflammatory responses in patients requiring OLV. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Ovid, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials focusing on dexmedetomidine's anti-inflammatory effects on patients requiring OLV without any limitation on the year of publication or languages. 20 clinical trials were assessed with 870 patients in the dexmedetomidine group and 844 in the control group. Our meta-analysis investigated the anti-inflammatory property of dexmedetomidine perioperatively [T1 (30-min OLV), T2 (90-min OLV), T3 (end of surgery) and T4 (postoperative day 1)], demonstrating that dexmedetomidine's intraoperative administration resulted in a significant reduction in serum concentration of interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α and other inflammatory cytokines perioperatively. By calculating specific I2 index, significant heterogeneity was observed on all occasions, with I2 index ranging from 95% to 99%. For IL-6 changes, sensitivity analysis showed that the exclusion of a single study led to a significant decrease of heterogeneity (96%-0%; p < 0.00001). Besides, pulmonary oxygenation was ameliorated in the dexmedetomidine group comparing with the control group. In conclusion, perioperative administration of dexmedetomidine can attenuate OLV induced inflammation, ameliorate pulmonary oxygenation, and may be conducive to a decreased occurrence of postoperative complications and better prognosis. However, the results should be prudently interpreted due to the evidence of heterogeneity and the limited number of studies.
| S-EPMC8453530 | 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:BACKGROUND:Proportional modes (proportional assist ventilation, PAV, and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, NAVA) could improve patient-ventilator interaction and consequently may be efficient as a weaning mode. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine whether proportional modes improved patient-ventilator interaction and whether they had an impact on the weaning success and length of mechanical ventilation, in comparison with PSV. METHODS:We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through May 13, 2018. We included both parallel-group and crossover randomized studies that examined the efficacy of proportional modes in comparison with PSV in mechanically ventilated adults. The primary outcomes were (1) asynchrony index (AI), (2) weaning failure, and (3) duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS:We included 15 studies (four evaluated PAV, ten evaluated NAVA, and one evaluated both modes). Although the use of proportional modes was not associated with a reduction in AI (WMD -?1.43; 95% CI -?3.11 to 0.25; p?=?0.096; PAV-one study, and NAVA-seven studies), the use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in patients with AI?>?10% (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04-0.58; p?=?0.006; PAV-two studies, and NAVA-five studies), compared with PSV. There was a significant heterogeneity among studies for AI, especially with NAVA. Compared with PSV, use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in weaning failure (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.26-0.75; p?=?0.003; PAV-three studies) and duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD -?1.78 days; 95% CI -?3.24 to -?0.32; p?=?0.017; PAV-three studies, and NAVA-two studies). Reduced duration of mechanical ventilation was found with PAV but not with NAVA. CONCLUSION:The use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in the incidence with AI?>?10%, weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation, compared with PSV. However, reduced weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation were found with only PAV. Due to a significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies, further investigation seems warranted to better understand the impact of proportional modes. Clinical trial registration PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017059791. Registered 20 March 2017.
| S-EPMC6288104 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Recruitment 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. METHODS:We 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. RESULTS:We 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. CONCLUSION:After 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.
| S-EPMC7484614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One-lung ventilation is also used in some thoracic or cardiac surgery, vascular surgery and oesophageal procedures. We conducted a search of the literature for relevant studies in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. The final literature search was performed on 10 December 2022. Primary outcomes included the quality of lung collapse. Secondary outcome measures included: the success of the first intubation attempt, malposition rate, time for device placement, lung collapse and adverse events occurrence. Twenty-five studies with 1636 patients were included. Excellent lung collapse among DLT and BB groups was 72.4% vs. 73.4%, respectively (OR = 1.20; 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.72; p = 0.31). The malposition rate was 25.3% vs. 31.9%, respectively (OR = 0.66; 95%CI: 0.49 to 0.88; p = 0.004). The use of DLT compared to BB was associated with a higher risk of hypoxemia (13.5% vs. 6.0%, respectively; OR = 2.27; 95%CI: 1.14 to 4.49; p = 0.02), hoarseness (25.2% vs. 13.0%; OR = 2.30; 95%CI: 1.39 to 3.82; p = 0.001), sore throat (40.3% vs. 23.3%; OR = 2.30; 95%CI: 1.68 to 3.14; p < 0.001), and bronchus/carina injuries (23.2% vs. 8.4%; OR = 3.45; 95%CI: 1.43 to 8.31; p = 0.006). The studies conducted so far on comparing DLT and BB are ambiguous. In the DLT compared to the BB group, the malposition rate was statistically significantly lower, and time to tube placement and lung collapse was shorter. However, the use of DLT compared to BB can be associated with a higher risk of hypoxemia, hoarseness, sore throat and bronchus/carina injuries. Multicenter randomized trials on larger groups of patients are needed to draw definitive conclusions regarding the superiority of any of these devices.
| S-EPMC10003923 | biostudies-literature