4.5 Article

High tidal volume ventilation induces NOS2 and impairs cAMP-dependent air space fluid clearance

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajplung.00331.2002

关键词

acute respiratory distress syndrome; acute lung injury; alveolar epithelium; ventilator-induced lung injury; pulmonary edema

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [K08 HL069900-03, HL-51854, HL-69900, R56 HL088440, K08 HL069900] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tidal volume reduction during mechanical ventilation reduces mortality in patients with acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. To determine the mechanisms underlying the protective effect of low tidal volume ventilation, we studied the time course and reversibility of ventilator-induced changes in permeability and distal air space edema fluid clearance in a rat model of ventilator-induced lung injury. Anesthetized rats were ventilated with a high tidal volume (30 ml/kg) or with a high tidal volume followed by ventilation with a low tidal volume of 6 ml/kg. Endothelial and epithelial protein permeability were significantly increased after high tidal volume ventilation but returned to baseline levels when tidal volume was reduced. The basal distal air space fluid clearance (AFC) rate decreased by 43% (P < 0.05) after 1 h of high tidal volume but returned to the preventilation rate 2 h after tidal volume was reduced. Not all of the effects of high tidal volume ventilation were reversible. The cAMP-dependent AFC rate after 1 h of 30 ml/kg ventilation was significantly reduced and was not restored when tidal volume was reduced. High tidal volume ventilation also increased lung inducible nitric oxide synthase (NOS2) expression and air space total nitrite at 3 h. Inhibition of NOS2 activity preserved cAMP-dependent AFC. Because air space edema fluid inactivates surfactant and reduces ventilated lung volume, the reduction of cAMP-dependent AFC by reactive nitrogen species may be an important mechanism of clinical ventilator-associated lung injury.

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

4.5
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