Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) versus pressure support ventilation (PSV)-A prospective intervention trial comparing haemodynamic parameters in intensive care patients.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-19 DOI:10.1111/aas.14434
Alexandru Ille, Carl Nilsson, Carl Sjödin, Shanay Daham, Per Persson, Carl Johan Svensson
{"title":"Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) versus pressure support ventilation (PSV)-A prospective intervention trial comparing haemodynamic parameters in intensive care patients.","authors":"Alexandru Ille, Carl Nilsson, Carl Sjödin, Shanay Daham, Per Persson, Carl Johan Svensson","doi":"10.1111/aas.14434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Assisted mechanical ventilation may alter the pressure profile in the thorax compared to normal breathing, which can affect the blood flow to and from the heart. Studies suggest that in patients with severe lung disease, airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) may be haemodynamically beneficial compared to other ventilator settings. The primary aim of this study was to investigate if APRV affects cardiac index in intubated intensive care patients without severe lung disease when compared to pressure support ventilation (PSV). The secondary aim comprised potential changes in other haemodynamic and ventilatory parameters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty patients were enrolled in the intensive care unit (ICU) at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Eligible patients met the inclusion criteria; 18 years of age or above, intubated and mechanically ventilated, triggering and stable on PSV mode, with indwelling haemodynamic monitoring via a pulse-induced continuous cardiac output (PiCCO) catheter. The study protocol started with a 30-min interval on PSV mode, followed by a 30-min interval on APRV mode, and finally a 30-min interval back on PSV mode. At the end of each interval, PiCCO outputs, ventilator outputs, arterial and venous blood gas analyses, heart rate and central venous pressure were recorded and compared between modes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in cardiac index (3.42 vs. 3.39 L/min/m<sup>2</sup>) between PSV and APRV, but a significant increase in central venous pressure (+1.0 mmHg, p = .027). Furthermore, we found a significant reduction in peak airway pressure (-3.16 cmH<sub>2</sub>O, p < .01) and an increase in mean airway pressure (+2.1 cmH<sub>2</sub>O, p < .01). No statistically significant change was found in oxygenation index (partial pressure of O<sub>2</sub> [pO<sub>2</sub>]/fraction of inspired oxygen) nor in other secondary outcomes when comparing PSV and APRV. There was no significant association between global end-diastolic volume index and cardiac index (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.0089) or central venous pressure (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.278). All parameters returned to baseline after switching the ventilator mode back to PSV.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We could not detect any changes in cardiac index in ICU patients without severe lung disease during APRV compared to PSV mode, despite lower peak airway pressure and increased mean airway pressure.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"932-939"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14434","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim: Assisted mechanical ventilation may alter the pressure profile in the thorax compared to normal breathing, which can affect the blood flow to and from the heart. Studies suggest that in patients with severe lung disease, airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) may be haemodynamically beneficial compared to other ventilator settings. The primary aim of this study was to investigate if APRV affects cardiac index in intubated intensive care patients without severe lung disease when compared to pressure support ventilation (PSV). The secondary aim comprised potential changes in other haemodynamic and ventilatory parameters.

Methods: Twenty patients were enrolled in the intensive care unit (ICU) at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Eligible patients met the inclusion criteria; 18 years of age or above, intubated and mechanically ventilated, triggering and stable on PSV mode, with indwelling haemodynamic monitoring via a pulse-induced continuous cardiac output (PiCCO) catheter. The study protocol started with a 30-min interval on PSV mode, followed by a 30-min interval on APRV mode, and finally a 30-min interval back on PSV mode. At the end of each interval, PiCCO outputs, ventilator outputs, arterial and venous blood gas analyses, heart rate and central venous pressure were recorded and compared between modes.

Results: There was no significant difference in cardiac index (3.42 vs. 3.39 L/min/m2) between PSV and APRV, but a significant increase in central venous pressure (+1.0 mmHg, p = .027). Furthermore, we found a significant reduction in peak airway pressure (-3.16 cmH2O, p < .01) and an increase in mean airway pressure (+2.1 cmH2O, p < .01). No statistically significant change was found in oxygenation index (partial pressure of O2 [pO2]/fraction of inspired oxygen) nor in other secondary outcomes when comparing PSV and APRV. There was no significant association between global end-diastolic volume index and cardiac index (R2 = 0.0089) or central venous pressure (R2 = 0.278). All parameters returned to baseline after switching the ventilator mode back to PSV.

Conclusion: We could not detect any changes in cardiac index in ICU patients without severe lung disease during APRV compared to PSV mode, despite lower peak airway pressure and increased mean airway pressure.

气道压力释放通气(APRV)与压力支持通气(PSV)--一项比较重症监护患者血流动力学参数的前瞻性干预试验。
背景和目的:与正常呼吸相比,辅助机械通气可能会改变胸腔内的压力曲线,从而影响进出心脏的血流。研究表明,对于严重肺部疾病患者,气道压力释放通气(APRV)与其他呼吸机设置相比可能对血流动力学有益。本研究的主要目的是调查与压力支持通气(PSV)相比,气道压力释放通气是否会影响无严重肺部疾病的插管重症监护患者的心脏指数。次要目的包括其他血流动力学和通气参数的潜在变化:Sahlgrenska 大学医院重症监护室 (ICU) 接收了 20 名患者。合格患者均符合纳入标准:18 岁或以上,插管并进行机械通气,在 PSV 模式下触发并稳定,通过脉冲诱导连续心输出量(PiCCO)导管进行留置血流动力学监测。研究方案首先在 PSV 模式下进行 30 分钟的间歇,然后在 APRV 模式下进行 30 分钟的间歇,最后在 PSV 模式下进行 30 分钟的间歇。每次间隔结束时,记录并比较 PiCCO 输出、呼吸机输出、动脉和静脉血气分析、心率和中心静脉压:PSV 和 APRV 的心脏指数(3.42 对 3.39 L/min/m2)无明显差异,但中心静脉压明显升高(+1.0 mmHg,p = .027)。此外,在比较 PSV 和 APRV 时,我们还发现气道峰压显著降低(-3.16 cmH2O,p 2O,p 2 [pO2]/吸入氧分压),其他次要结果也是如此。整体舒张末期容积指数与心脏指数(R2 = 0.0089)或中心静脉压(R2 = 0.278)之间无明显关联。将呼吸机模式切换回 PSV 后,所有参数均恢复至基线:结论:与 PSV 模式相比,尽管峰值气道压降低,平均气道压升高,但在 APRV 过程中,我们无法检测到无严重肺部疾病的 ICU 患者的心脏指数有任何变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信