Back to Search Start Over

Individualized flow-controlled ventilation compared to best clinical practice pressure-controlled ventilation: a prospective randomized porcine study

Authors :
Tom Barnes
Patrick Spraider
Gabriel Putzer
Judith Martini
Bernhard Glodny
Tobias Hell
Julia Abram
Dietmar Enk
Source :
Critical Care
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
Research Square Platform LLC, 2020.

Abstract

BackgroundFlow-controlled ventilation is a novel ventilation method which allows to individualize ventilation according to dynamic lung mechanic limits based on direct tracheal pressure measurement at a stable constant gas flow during inspiration and expiration. The aim of this porcine study was to compare individualized flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) and current guideline-conform pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) in long-term ventilation.MethodsAnesthetized pigs were ventilated with either FCV or PCV over a period of 10 h with a fixed FiO2of 0.3. FCV settings were individualized by compliance-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and peak pressure (Ppeak) titration. Flow was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the inspiration to expiration ratio (I:E ratio) was set at 1:1. PCV was performed with a PEEP of 5 cm H2O andPpeakwas set to achieve a tidal volume (VT) of 7 ml/kg. The respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the I:E ratio was set at 1:1.5. Repeated measurements during observation period were assessed by linear mixed-effects model.ResultsIn FCV (n = 6), respiratory minute volume was significantly reduced (6.0 vs 12.7, MD − 6.8 (− 8.2 to − 5.4) l/min;p n = 6). Oxygenation was improved in the FCV group (paO2119.8 vs 96.6, MD 23.2 (9.0 to 37.5) Torr; 15.97 vs 12.87, MD 3.10 (1.19 to 5.00) kPa;p = 0.010) and CO2removal was more efficient (paCO240.1 vs 44.9, MD − 4.7 (− 7.4 to − 2.0) Torr; 5.35 vs 5.98, MD − 0.63 (− 0.99 to − 0.27) kPa;p = 0.006).Ppeakand driving pressure were comparable in both groups, whereas PEEP was significantly lower in FCV (p = 0.002). Computed tomography revealed a significant reduction in non-aerated lung tissue in individualized FCV (p = 0.026) and no significant difference in overdistended lung tissue, although a significantly higherVTwas applied (8.2 vs 7.6, MD 0.7 (0.2 to 1.2) ml/kg;p = 0.025).ConclusionOur long-term ventilation study demonstrates the applicability of a compliance-guided individualization of FCV settings, which resulted in significantly improved gas exchange and lung tissue aeration without signs of overinflation as compared to best clinical practice PCV.

Details

Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Critical Care
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....bee7e44348e49bb1dda5aefdf2f68cf7
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-55104/v1