4.7 Article

ARDSnet Ventilatory protocol and alveolar hyperinflation - Role of positive end-expiratory pressure

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200702-193OC

关键词

acute lung injury; inflammatory response; mechanical ventilation; ventilator-induced lung injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a focal distribution of loss of aeration in lung computed tomography predicts low potential for alveolar recruitment and susceptibility to alveolar hyperinflation with high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Objectives: We tested the hypothesis that, in this cohort of patients, the table-based PEEP setting criteria of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's ARDS Network (ARDSnet) low tidal volume ventilatory protocol could induce tidal alveolar hyperinflation. Methods: In 15 patients, physiologic parameters and plasma inflammatory mediators were measured during two ventilatory strategies, applied randomly: the ARDSnet and the stress index strategy. The latter used the same ARDSnet ventilatory pattern except for the PEEP level, which was adjusted based on the stress index, a monitoring tool intended to quantify tidal alveolar hyperinflation and/or recruiting /derecruiting that occurs during constant-flow ventilation, on a breath-by-breath basis. Measurements and Main Results: In all patients, the stress index revealed alveolar hyperinflation during application of the ARDSnet strategy, and consequently, PEEP was significantly decreased (P < 0.01) to normalize the stress index value. Static lung elastance (P = 0.01), plasma concentrations of interleukin-6 (P < 0.01), interleukin-8 (P=0.031), and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor I (P = 0.013) were significantly lower during the stress index as compared with the ARDSnet strategy-guided ventilation. Conclusions: Alveolar hyperinflation in patients with focal ARDS ventilated with the ARDSnet protocol is attenuated by a physiologic approach to PEEP setting based on the stress index measurement.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据