Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2002
Crossover trial comparing pressure support with synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Olsen Steven L, Thibeault Donald W, Truog William E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare pressure support ventilation (PSV) with volume guarantee (VG) to synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) in infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, crossover study design was used. We enrolled 14 infants [BW (mean+/-SD) 2.5+/-0.7 kg, GA 34+/-2 weeks, age 49+/-26 hours]. Subjects received 4 hours of each mode of ventilation, with the first mode selected randomly. End expiratory volume (EEV) was measured during both ventilatory modes.
RESULTS: Minute ventilation was greater with PSV+VG than with SIMV (p=0.012). This occurred despite no difference in p(a)CO(2). Mean airway pressure was higher during PSV+VG (p=0.023). There was no difference in the arterial/alveolar oxygen tension (a/A) ratio or in the specific dynamic compliance (sCdyn).
CONCLUSION: Because of an increase in V(E) with PSV+VG, and no difference in the a/A ratio or sCdyn, we do not recommend the routine use of PSV+VG for this population.
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, crossover study design was used. We enrolled 14 infants [BW (mean+/-SD) 2.5+/-0.7 kg, GA 34+/-2 weeks, age 49+/-26 hours]. Subjects received 4 hours of each mode of ventilation, with the first mode selected randomly. End expiratory volume (EEV) was measured during both ventilatory modes.
RESULTS: Minute ventilation was greater with PSV+VG than with SIMV (p=0.012). This occurred despite no difference in p(a)CO(2). Mean airway pressure was higher during PSV+VG (p=0.023). There was no difference in the arterial/alveolar oxygen tension (a/A) ratio or in the specific dynamic compliance (sCdyn).
CONCLUSION: Because of an increase in V(E) with PSV+VG, and no difference in the a/A ratio or sCdyn, we do not recommend the routine use of PSV+VG for this population.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Carbon DioxideCross-Over StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureIntermittent Positive-Pressure VentilationMaleProbabilityPulmonary Gas ExchangeReference ValuesRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornRespiratory Function TestsSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness IndexTreatment Outcome