Search

Lung ultrasound can be routinely performed at the bedside by intensive care unit physicians and may provide accurate information on lung status with diagnostic and therapeutic relevance. This article reviews the performance of bedside lung ultrasound for diagnosing pleural effusion, pneumothorax, alveolar-interstitial syndrome, lung consolidation, pulmonary abscess and lung recruitment/derecruitment in critically ill patients with acute lung injury.

Mechanical ventilation is indispensable for the survival of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, excessive tidal volumes and inadequate lung recruitment may contribute to mortality by causing ventilator-induced lung injury. This bench-to-bedside review presents the scientific rationale for using adjuncts to mechanical ventilation aimed at optimizing lung recruitment and preventing the deleterious consequences of reduced tidal volume. To enhance CO2elimination when tidal volume is reduced, the following are possible: first, ventilator respiratory frequency can be increased without necessarily generating intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure; second, instrumental dead space can be reduced by replacing the heat and moisture exchanger with a conventional humidifier; and third, expiratory washout can be used for replacing the CO2-laden gas present at end expiration in the instrumental dead space by a fresh gas (this method is still experimental). For optimizing lung recruitment and preventing lung derecruitment there are the following possibilities: first, recruitment manoeuvres may be performed in the most hypoxaemic patients before implementing the preset positive end-expiratory pressure or after episodes of accidental lung derecruitment; second, the patient can be turned to the prone position; third, closed-circuit endotracheal suctioning is to be preferred to open endotracheal suctioning.

Physiological background concerning mechanics of the respiratory system, techniques of measurement and clinical implications of pressure-volume curve measurement in mechanically ventilated patients are discussed in the present review. The significance of lower and upper inflection points, the assessment of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced alveolar recruitment and overdistension and rationale for optimizing ventilatory settings in patients with acute lung injury are presented. Evidence suggests that the continuous flow method is a simple and reliable technique for measuring pressure-volume curves at the bedside. In patients with acute respiratory failure, determination of lower and upper inflection points and measurement of respiratory compliance should become a part of the routine assessment of lung injury severity, allowing a bedside monitoring of the evolution of the lung disease and an optimization of mechanical ventilation.

Introduction Air-space enlargement may result from mechanical ventilation and/or lung infection. The aim of this study was to assess how mechanical ventilation and lung infection influence the genesis of bronchiolar and alveolar distention.Methods Four groups of piglets were studied: non-ventilated-non-inoculated (controls, n = 5), non-ventilated-inoculated (n = 6), ventilated-non-inoculated (n = 6), and ventilated-inoculated (n = 8) piglets. The respiratory tract of intubated piglets was inoculated with a highly concentrated solution of Escherichia coli. Mechanical ventilation was maintained during 60 hours with a tidal volume of 15 ml/kg and zero positive end-expiratory pressure. After sacrifice by exsanguination, lungs were fixed for histological and lung morphometry analyses.Results Lung infection was present in all inoculated piglets and in five of the six ventilated-non-inoculated piglets. Mean alveolar and mean bronchiolar areas, measured using an analyzer computer system connected through a high-resolution color camera to an optical microscope, were significantly increased in non-ventilated-inoculated animals (+16% and +11%, respectively, compared to controls), in ventilated-non-inoculated animals (+49% and +49%, respectively, compared to controls), and in ventilated-inoculated animals (+95% and +118%, respectively, compared to controls). Mean alveolar and mean bronchiolar areas significantly correlated with the extension of lung infection (R = 0.50, p < 0.01 and R = 0.67, p < 0.001, respectively).Conclusion Lung infection induces bronchiolar and alveolar distention. Mechanical ventilation induces secondary lung infection and is associated with further air-space enlargement. The combination of primary lung infection and mechanical ventilation markedly increases air-space enlargement, the degree of which depends on the severity and extension of lung infection.

Introduction Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced lung derecruitment can be assessed by a pressure–volume (P–V) curve method or by lung computed tomography (CT). However, only the first method can be used at the bedside. The aim of the study was to compare both methods for assessing alveolar derecruitment after the removal of PEEP in patients with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome.Methods P–V curves (constant-flow method) and spiral CT scans of the whole lung were performed at PEEPs of 15 and 0 cmH2O in 19 patients with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Alveolar derecruitment was defined as the difference in lung volume measured at an airway pressure of 15 cmH2O on P–V curves performed at PEEPs of 15 and 0 cmH2O, and as the difference in the CT volume of gas present in poorly aerated and nonaerated lung regions at PEEPs of 15 and 0 cmH2O.Results Alveolar derecruitments measured by the CT and P–V curve methods were 373 ± 250 and 345 ± 208 ml (p = 0.14), respectively. Measurements by both methods were tightly correlated (R = 0.82, p < 0.0001). The derecruited volume measured by the P–V curve method had a bias of -14 ml and limits of agreement of between -158 and +130 ml in comparison with the average derecruited volume of the CT and P–V curve methods.Conclusion Alveolar derecruitment measured by the CT and P–V curve methods are tightly correlated. However, the large limits of agreement indicate that the P–V curve and the CT method are not interchangeable.