Critical care medicine · 2007
Biologically variable ventilation improves gas exchange and respiratory mechanics in a model of severe bronchospasm.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Mutch W Alan C, Buchman Timothy G, Girling Linda G, Walker Elizabeth K-Y, McManus Bruce M, Graham M Ruth
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Mechanical ventilation can be lifesaving for status asthmaticus, but how best to accomplish mechanical ventilation is unclear. Biologically variable ventilation (mechanical ventilation that emulates healthy variation) and conventional control mode ventilation (monotonously regular) were compared in an animal model of bronchospasm to determine which approach yields better gas exchange and respiratory mechanics.
DESIGN: A randomized prospective trial of biologically variable ventilation vs. control mode ventilation in swine.
SETTING: University research laboratory.
SUBJECTS: Eighteen farm-raised pigs.
INTERVENTIONS: Methacholine was administered as a nebulized aerosol to initiate bronchospasm, defined as doubling of peak inspiratory pressure and respiratory system resistance, and then randomized (n = 9 each group) to either continue control mode ventilation or switch to biologically variable ventilation at the same minute ventilation. Over the next 4 hrs, hemodynamics, blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and carbon dioxide expirograms were recorded hourly. At end-experiment, tracheobronchial lavage was undertaken to determine interleukin-6 and -10 concentrations.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements of physiologic variables and inflammatory cytokines showed that biologically variable ventilation significantly improved gas exchange, with greater arterial oxygen tensions (p = .006; group x time interaction), lower arterial carbon dioxide tensions (p = .0003; group effect), lower peak inspiratory pressures (p = .0001; group x time), greater static compliance (p = .0001; group x time), greater dynamic compliance (p = .0001; group x time), and lower total respiratory system resistance (p = .028; group x time), compared with conventional ventilation. The appearance of inflammatory cytokines in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (interleukin-6 and -10) was not affected by mode of ventilation.
CONCLUSIONS: In this experimental model, biologically variable ventilation was superior to control mode ventilation in terms of gas exchange and respiratory mechanics during severe bronchospasm.
DESIGN: A randomized prospective trial of biologically variable ventilation vs. control mode ventilation in swine.
SETTING: University research laboratory.
SUBJECTS: Eighteen farm-raised pigs.
INTERVENTIONS: Methacholine was administered as a nebulized aerosol to initiate bronchospasm, defined as doubling of peak inspiratory pressure and respiratory system resistance, and then randomized (n = 9 each group) to either continue control mode ventilation or switch to biologically variable ventilation at the same minute ventilation. Over the next 4 hrs, hemodynamics, blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and carbon dioxide expirograms were recorded hourly. At end-experiment, tracheobronchial lavage was undertaken to determine interleukin-6 and -10 concentrations.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements of physiologic variables and inflammatory cytokines showed that biologically variable ventilation significantly improved gas exchange, with greater arterial oxygen tensions (p = .006; group x time interaction), lower arterial carbon dioxide tensions (p = .0003; group effect), lower peak inspiratory pressures (p = .0001; group x time), greater static compliance (p = .0001; group x time), greater dynamic compliance (p = .0001; group x time), and lower total respiratory system resistance (p = .028; group x time), compared with conventional ventilation. The appearance of inflammatory cytokines in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (interleukin-6 and -10) was not affected by mode of ventilation.
CONCLUSIONS: In this experimental model, biologically variable ventilation was superior to control mode ventilation in terms of gas exchange and respiratory mechanics during severe bronchospasm.