Effect of trunk upward verticalization on pulmonary vascular resistance in ARDS

Abstract

Dear Editor,

Bouchant et al. examined the effects of progressive verticalization on lung mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) [1]. We commended the authors for this high-quality research. Several of their findings are particularly noteworthy and warrant further discussion.

Changes in trunk inclination affect respiratory mechanics, oxygenation, ventilation distribution, and ventilatory efficiency in patients with acute respiratory failure [2]. When patients are transitioned from a flat supine position to a semi-recumbent position, the driving pressure increases, respiratory system compliance decreases, and ventilatory efficiency for carbon dioxide (CO₂) removal decreases [3,4,5,6].

Marrazzo et al. observed that the PEEP level optimized in the flat supine position led to overdistension when patients were moved to a semi-recumbent position [7]. Therefore, the change in trunk inclination from a flat supine position to a semi-recumbent position could generate a similar effect as an increase in PEEP levels.

In this way, both the effect of PEEP setting and trunk inclination on respiratory mechanics could depend on lung recruitment potential [8]. These studies revealed that in patients with low recruitment potential, an increase in PEEP results in minimal lung volume expansion, elevated airway pressure, increased pulmonary vascular resistance, and impaired right ventricular function [8, 9].

In a comprehensive hemodynamic assessment using pulmonary artery catheterization, Bouchant et al. investigated the effects of progressive verticalization in 30 ARDS patients by optimizing the PEEP level in a 30° semi-recumbent position and maintaining it unchanged throughout the study [1]. The study demonstrated a consistent increase in pulmonary vascular resistance as the verticalization angle progressed from supine (0°) to upright (90°). Specifically, the pulmonary vascular resistance increased from 181 (143–266) dyn·s·cm⁻⁵ at 0° to 287 (241–429) dyn·s·cm⁻⁵ at 90°, indicating a clear association between vertical positioning and vascular resistance. Likewise, cardiac output steadily declined from 6.5 (4.8–8.0) L/min at 0° to 4.8 (3.2–5.8) L/min at 90°, requiring increasing vasopressor support to maintain adequate perfusion. Interestingly, the end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) increased from 24 mL/kg (15–30 mL/kg) at 0° to 34 mL/kg (27–37 mL/kg) at 90°, while respiratory system compliance decreased from 43 mL/cmH₂O (32–49 mL/cmH₂O) at 0° to 25 mL/cmH₂O (21–37 mL/cmH₂O) at 90°, being the elasticity of the chest wall the most affected component of postural changes. Likewise, PaCO₂ levels progressively increased from 45 (37–50) mm Hg at 0° to 51 (42–60) mm Hg at 90°, reflecting a concurrent deterioration in gas exchange. In summary, upward verticalization without modification of the PEEP level was associated with increased pulmonary vascular resistance, reduced cardiac output, impaired CO₂ clearance, and decreased respiratory system compliance. Thus, alveolar overdistension could partially explain these findings.

In this context, progressive trunk verticalization likely induces airway pressure changes comparable to those observed with increased PEEP in poorly recruitable lungs, where PEEP elevation minimally expands lung volume but disproportionately increases airway pressure [8, 9]. This imbalance leads to alveolar overdistension, capillary compression, reduction in cross-sectional vascular area, and increased pulmonary vascular resistance [10]. Therefore, under conditions of low lung recruitment, upward verticalization may similarly exacerbate these effects, where the expansion of already aerated alveoli, rather than the recruitment of previously collapsed units, can lead to alveolar overdistension, capillary compression, and hemodynamic impairments.

Based on these observations, the following question arises: Can lung recruitment assessment be a key factor in understanding hemodynamic, lung mechanics, and gas exchange responses to trunk inclination changes in ARDS?

The relationship between recruitment potential and the physiological effects of trunk verticalization may provide valuable insights for individualizing patient positioning strategies. Understanding this association could help anticipate both pulmonary and systemic hemodynamic responses, potentially preventing adverse outcomes during positional interventions in ARDS patients.

In conclusion, the elegant study by Bouchant et al. provides valuable insights into hemodynamic compromise associated with upward verticalization. It also paves the way for future research on whether lung recruitment can explain the adverse effects associated with trunk elevation. These observations reinforce the need to investigate trunk inclination settings as a critical factor for optimizing PEEP in clinical practice and research.

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

ARDS:

Acute respiratory distress syndrome

CO₂ :

Carbon dioxide

C-ARDS:

COVID-19-associated ARDS

EELV:

End-expiratory lung volume

PEEP:

Positive end-expiratory pressure

1. Bouchant L, Godet T, Arpajou G, Aupetitgendre L, Cayot S, Guerin R, et al. Physiological effects and safety of bed verticalization in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care. 2024;28(1):262. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05013-y.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

2. Benites MH, Zapata-Canivilo M, Poblete F, Labbe F, Battiato R, Ferre A, et al. Physiological and clinical effects of trunk inclination adjustment in patients with respiratory failure: a scoping review and narrative synthesis. Crit Care. 2024;28(1):228. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05010-1.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

3. Mezidi M, Guérin C. Effect of body position and inclination in supine and prone position on respiratory mechanics in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(2):292–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5493-1.

   Article PubMed Google Scholar

4. Marrazzo F, Spina S, Forlini C, Guarnieri M, Giudici R, Bassi G, et al. Effects of trunk inclination on respiratory mechanics in patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: Let’s always report the angle! Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2022;205(5):582–4. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202110-2360LE.

   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

5. Marrazzo F, Spina S, Zadek F, Forlini C, Bassi G, Giudici R, et al. Ventilation distribution during changes in trunk inclination in patients with ARDS. Respir Care. 2024;69(2):222–6. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11175.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

6. Benites MH, Torres D, Poblete F, Labbe F, Bachmann MC, Regueira TE, et al. Effects of changes in trunk inclination on ventilatory efficiency in ARDS patients: quasi-experimental study. Intensive Care Med Exp. 2023;11(1):65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-023-00550-2.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

7. Marrazzo F, Spina S, Zadek F, Forlini C, Bassi G, Giudici R, et al. PEEP titration is markedly affected by trunk inclination in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS: a physiologic, cross-over study. J Clin Med. 2023;12(12):3914. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12123914.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

8. CappioBorlino S, Hagry J, Lai C, Rocca E, Fouqué G, Rosalba D, et al. The effect of positive end-expiratory pressure on pulmonary vascular resistance depends on lung recruitability in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2024;210(7):900–7. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202402-0383OC.

   Article Google Scholar

9. Chen L, Del Sorbo L, Grieco DL, Junhasavasdikul D, Rittayamai N, Soliman I, et al. Potential for lung recruitment estimated by the recruitment-to-inflation ratio in acute respiratory distress syndrome. A clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;201(2):178–87. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201902-0334OC.

   Article PubMed Google Scholar

10. Price LC, Wort SJ, Finney SJ, Marino PS, Brett SJ. Pulmonary vascular and right ventricular dysfunction in adult critical care: current and emerging options for management: a systematic literature review. Crit Care. 2010;14(5):R169. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc9264.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

None.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Authors and Affiliations

1. Facultad de MedicinaEscuela de Medicina, Universidad Finis Terrae, Santiago, Chile

   Martín H. Benites

2. Programa Doctorado en Ciencias MédicasEscuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

   Martín H. Benites

3. Unidad de Pacientes Críticos, Clínica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile

   Martín H. Benites

4. Departamento de Medicina Intensiva, Hospital Clínico Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

   Martín H. Benites & Jaime Retamal

Authors

1. Martín H. BenitesView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

2. Jaime RetamalView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MHB and JR mainly wrote the main manuscript text. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaime Retamal.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All authors agree to publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

Cite this article

Benites, M.H., Retamal, J. Effect of trunk upward verticalization on pulmonary vascular resistance in ARDS. Crit Care 29, 93 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05313-x

Download citation

• Received: 04 February 2025

• Accepted: 06 February 2025

• Published: 28 February 2025

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05313-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative