Roberto Brito, Caio C. A. Morais, Daniel H. Arellano, Abraham I. J. Gajardo, Alejandro Bruhn, Laurent J. Brochard, Marcelo B. P. Amato, Rodrigo A. Cornejo
{"title":"ARDS患者部分支持通气时双循环呼吸叠加:仅仅是自然变异性的特征吗?","authors":"Roberto Brito, Caio C. A. Morais, Daniel H. Arellano, Abraham I. J. Gajardo, Alejandro Bruhn, Laurent J. Brochard, Marcelo B. P. Amato, Rodrigo A. Cornejo","doi":"10.1186/s13054-025-05260-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Double cycling with breath-stacking (DC/BS) during controlled mechanical ventilation is considered potentially injurious, reflecting a high respiratory drive. During partial ventilatory support, its occurrence might be attributable to physiological variability of breathing patterns, reflecting the response of the mode without carrying specific risks. This secondary analysis of a crossover study evaluated DC/BS events in hypoxemic patients resuming spontaneous breathing in cross-over under neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), proportional assist ventilation (PAV +), and pressure support ventilation (PSV). DC/BS was defined as two inspiratory cycles with incomplete exhalation. Measurements included electrical impedance signal, airway pressure, esophageal and gastric pressures, and flow. Breathing variability, dynamic compliance (CLdyn), and end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) were analyzed. Twenty patients under assisted breathing, with a median of 9 [5–14] days on mechanical ventilation, were included. DC/BS was attributed to either a single (42%) or two apparent consecutive inspiratory efforts (58%). The median [IQR] incidence of DC/BS was low: 0.6 [0.1–2.6] % in NAVA, 0.0 [0.0–0.4] % in PAV + , and 0.1 [0.0–0.4] % in PSV (p = 0.06). DC/BS events were associated with patient’s coefficient of variability for tidal volume (p = 0.014) and respiratory rate (p = 0.011). DC/BS breaths exhibited higher tidal volume, muscular pressure and regional stretch compared to regular breaths. Post-DC/BS cycles frequently exhibited improved EELI and CLdyn, with no evidence of expiratory muscle activation in 63% of cases. DC/BS events during partial ventilatory support were infrequent and linked to breathing variability. Their frequency and physiological effects on lung compliance and EELI resemble spontaneous sighs and may not be considered a priori as harmful.","PeriodicalId":10811,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Double cycling with breath-stacking during partial support ventilation in ARDS: Just a feature of natural variability?\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Brito, Caio C. A. Morais, Daniel H. Arellano, Abraham I. J. Gajardo, Alejandro Bruhn, Laurent J. Brochard, Marcelo B. P. Amato, Rodrigo A. Cornejo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13054-025-05260-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Double cycling with breath-stacking (DC/BS) during controlled mechanical ventilation is considered potentially injurious, reflecting a high respiratory drive. During partial ventilatory support, its occurrence might be attributable to physiological variability of breathing patterns, reflecting the response of the mode without carrying specific risks. This secondary analysis of a crossover study evaluated DC/BS events in hypoxemic patients resuming spontaneous breathing in cross-over under neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), proportional assist ventilation (PAV +), and pressure support ventilation (PSV). DC/BS was defined as two inspiratory cycles with incomplete exhalation. Measurements included electrical impedance signal, airway pressure, esophageal and gastric pressures, and flow. Breathing variability, dynamic compliance (CLdyn), and end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) were analyzed. Twenty patients under assisted breathing, with a median of 9 [5–14] days on mechanical ventilation, were included. DC/BS was attributed to either a single (42%) or two apparent consecutive inspiratory efforts (58%). The median [IQR] incidence of DC/BS was low: 0.6 [0.1–2.6] % in NAVA, 0.0 [0.0–0.4] % in PAV + , and 0.1 [0.0–0.4] % in PSV (p = 0.06). DC/BS events were associated with patient’s coefficient of variability for tidal volume (p = 0.014) and respiratory rate (p = 0.011). DC/BS breaths exhibited higher tidal volume, muscular pressure and regional stretch compared to regular breaths. Post-DC/BS cycles frequently exhibited improved EELI and CLdyn, with no evidence of expiratory muscle activation in 63% of cases. DC/BS events during partial ventilatory support were infrequent and linked to breathing variability. Their frequency and physiological effects on lung compliance and EELI resemble spontaneous sighs and may not be considered a priori as harmful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05260-7\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-025-05260-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Double cycling with breath-stacking during partial support ventilation in ARDS: Just a feature of natural variability?
Double cycling with breath-stacking (DC/BS) during controlled mechanical ventilation is considered potentially injurious, reflecting a high respiratory drive. During partial ventilatory support, its occurrence might be attributable to physiological variability of breathing patterns, reflecting the response of the mode without carrying specific risks. This secondary analysis of a crossover study evaluated DC/BS events in hypoxemic patients resuming spontaneous breathing in cross-over under neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), proportional assist ventilation (PAV +), and pressure support ventilation (PSV). DC/BS was defined as two inspiratory cycles with incomplete exhalation. Measurements included electrical impedance signal, airway pressure, esophageal and gastric pressures, and flow. Breathing variability, dynamic compliance (CLdyn), and end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) were analyzed. Twenty patients under assisted breathing, with a median of 9 [5–14] days on mechanical ventilation, were included. DC/BS was attributed to either a single (42%) or two apparent consecutive inspiratory efforts (58%). The median [IQR] incidence of DC/BS was low: 0.6 [0.1–2.6] % in NAVA, 0.0 [0.0–0.4] % in PAV + , and 0.1 [0.0–0.4] % in PSV (p = 0.06). DC/BS events were associated with patient’s coefficient of variability for tidal volume (p = 0.014) and respiratory rate (p = 0.011). DC/BS breaths exhibited higher tidal volume, muscular pressure and regional stretch compared to regular breaths. Post-DC/BS cycles frequently exhibited improved EELI and CLdyn, with no evidence of expiratory muscle activation in 63% of cases. DC/BS events during partial ventilatory support were infrequent and linked to breathing variability. Their frequency and physiological effects on lung compliance and EELI resemble spontaneous sighs and may not be considered a priori as harmful.
期刊介绍:
Critical Care is an esteemed international medical journal that undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to maintain its high quality standards. Its primary objective is to enhance the healthcare services offered to critically ill patients. To achieve this, the journal focuses on gathering, exchanging, disseminating, and endorsing evidence-based information that is highly relevant to intensivists. By doing so, Critical Care seeks to provide a thorough and inclusive examination of the intensive care field.