俯卧位加气道压力释放通气对COVID-19 ARDS患者氧合的影响。

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Bişar Ergün, Mehmet Nuri Yakar, Murat Küçük, Narmin Baghiyeva, Ahmet Naci Emecen, Erdem Yaka, Begüm Ergan, Ali Necati Gökmen
{"title":"俯卧位加气道压力释放通气对COVID-19 ARDS患者氧合的影响。","authors":"Bişar Ergün,&nbsp;Mehmet Nuri Yakar,&nbsp;Murat Küçük,&nbsp;Narmin Baghiyeva,&nbsp;Ahmet Naci Emecen,&nbsp;Erdem Yaka,&nbsp;Begüm Ergan,&nbsp;Ali Necati Gökmen","doi":"10.4274/TJAR.2022.22783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) support and prone positioning are essential treatments for severe COVID-19 ARDS. We aimed to determine the combined effect of prone position and airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) modes on oxygen improvement in mechanically-ventilated patients with COVID-19. Methods: This prospective observational study included 40 eligible patients (13 female, 27 male). Of 40 patients, 23 (57.5%) were ventilated with APRV and 17 (42.5%) were ventilated with controlled modes. A prone position was applied when the PaO2/FiO2 ratio <150 mmHg despite IMV in COVID-19 ARDS. The numbers of patients who completed the first, second, and third prone were 40, 25, and 15, respectively. Incident barotrauma events were diagnosed by both clinical findings and radiological images. Results: After the second prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [189 (150-237)] vs. 127 (100-146) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.025). Similarly, after the third prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [194 (132-263)] vs. 83 (71-136) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.021). Barotrauma events were detected in 13.0% of the patients in the APRV group and 11.8% of the patients in the control group (P=1000). The 28-day mortality was not different in the APRV group than in the control group (73.9% vs. 70.6%, respectively, P=1000). Conclusion: Using the APRV mode during prone positioning improves oxygenation, especially in the second and third prone positions, without increasing the risk of barotrauma. However, no benefit on mortality was detected.","PeriodicalId":23353,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","volume":"51 3","pages":"188-198"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339750/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined Effects of Prone Positioning and Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Oxygenation in Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.\",\"authors\":\"Bişar Ergün,&nbsp;Mehmet Nuri Yakar,&nbsp;Murat Küçük,&nbsp;Narmin Baghiyeva,&nbsp;Ahmet Naci Emecen,&nbsp;Erdem Yaka,&nbsp;Begüm Ergan,&nbsp;Ali Necati Gökmen\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/TJAR.2022.22783\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) support and prone positioning are essential treatments for severe COVID-19 ARDS. We aimed to determine the combined effect of prone position and airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) modes on oxygen improvement in mechanically-ventilated patients with COVID-19. Methods: This prospective observational study included 40 eligible patients (13 female, 27 male). Of 40 patients, 23 (57.5%) were ventilated with APRV and 17 (42.5%) were ventilated with controlled modes. A prone position was applied when the PaO2/FiO2 ratio <150 mmHg despite IMV in COVID-19 ARDS. The numbers of patients who completed the first, second, and third prone were 40, 25, and 15, respectively. Incident barotrauma events were diagnosed by both clinical findings and radiological images. Results: After the second prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [189 (150-237)] vs. 127 (100-146) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.025). Similarly, after the third prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [194 (132-263)] vs. 83 (71-136) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.021). Barotrauma events were detected in 13.0% of the patients in the APRV group and 11.8% of the patients in the control group (P=1000). The 28-day mortality was not different in the APRV group than in the control group (73.9% vs. 70.6%, respectively, P=1000). Conclusion: Using the APRV mode during prone positioning improves oxygenation, especially in the second and third prone positions, without increasing the risk of barotrauma. However, no benefit on mortality was detected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"188-198\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339750/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2022.22783\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2022.22783","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:冠状病毒病2019 (COVID-19)可引起急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)。有创机械通气(IMV)支持和俯卧位是重症COVID-19 ARDS的基本治疗方法。我们的目的是确定俯卧位和气道压力释放通气(APRV)模式对机械通气的COVID-19患者氧改善的联合影响。方法:本前瞻性观察研究纳入40例符合条件的患者(女性13例,男性27例)。40例患者中,APRV通气23例(57.5%),控制模式通气17例(42.5%)。结果:第二次俯卧后,APRV组PaO2/FiO2比值高于对照组[189(150-237)]和127 (100-146)mmHg,差异有统计学意义(P=0.025)。同样,第三次发作后,APRV组PaO2/FiO2比值高于对照组[194(132-263)]和83 (71-136)mmHg,差异有统计学意义(P=0.021)。APRV组13.0%的患者检测到气压创伤事件,对照组11.8%的患者检测到气压创伤事件(P=1000)。APRV组28天死亡率与对照组无显著差异(分别为73.9% vs. 70.6%, P=1000)。结论:俯卧位时使用APRV模式可改善氧合,特别是在第二和第三俯卧位时,不会增加气压损伤的风险。然而,没有发现对死亡率有任何好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Combined Effects of Prone Positioning and Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Oxygenation in Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

Combined Effects of Prone Positioning and Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Oxygenation in Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

Combined Effects of Prone Positioning and Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Oxygenation in Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

Combined Effects of Prone Positioning and Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Oxygenation in Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.
Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) support and prone positioning are essential treatments for severe COVID-19 ARDS. We aimed to determine the combined effect of prone position and airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) modes on oxygen improvement in mechanically-ventilated patients with COVID-19. Methods: This prospective observational study included 40 eligible patients (13 female, 27 male). Of 40 patients, 23 (57.5%) were ventilated with APRV and 17 (42.5%) were ventilated with controlled modes. A prone position was applied when the PaO2/FiO2 ratio <150 mmHg despite IMV in COVID-19 ARDS. The numbers of patients who completed the first, second, and third prone were 40, 25, and 15, respectively. Incident barotrauma events were diagnosed by both clinical findings and radiological images. Results: After the second prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [189 (150-237)] vs. 127 (100-146) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.025). Similarly, after the third prone, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the APRV group was higher compared to the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of the control group [194 (132-263)] vs. 83 (71-136) mmHg, respectively, (P=0.021). Barotrauma events were detected in 13.0% of the patients in the APRV group and 11.8% of the patients in the control group (P=1000). The 28-day mortality was not different in the APRV group than in the control group (73.9% vs. 70.6%, respectively, P=1000). Conclusion: Using the APRV mode during prone positioning improves oxygenation, especially in the second and third prone positions, without increasing the risk of barotrauma. However, no benefit on mortality was detected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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