Intensive care medicine · 2010
Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist improves patient-ventilator interaction.
СтатьяПоддержка 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.
Piquilloud Lise, Vignaux Laurence, Bialais Emilie, Roeseler Jean, Sottiaux Thierry, Laterre Pierre-François, Jolliet Philippe, Tassaux Didier
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine if, compared with pressure support (PS), neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) reduces trigger delay, inspiratory time in excess, and the number of patient-ventilator asynchronies in intubated patients.
METHODS: Prospective interventional study in spontaneously breathing patients intubated for acute respiratory failure. Three consecutive periods of ventilation were applied: (1) PS1, (2) NAVA, (3) PS2. Airway pressure, flow, and transesophageal diaphragmatic electromyography were continuously recorded.
RESULTS: All results are reported as median (interquartile range, IQR). Twenty-two patients were included, 36.4% (8/22) having obstructive pulmonary disease. NAVA reduced trigger delay (ms): NAVA, 69 (57-85); PS1, 178 (139-245); PS2, 199 (135-256). NAVA improved expiratory synchrony: inspiratory time in excess (ms): NAVA, 126 (111-136); PS1, 204 (117-345); PS2, 220 (127-366). Total asynchrony events were reduced with NAVA (events/min): NAVA, 1.21 (0.54-3.36); PS1, 3.15 (1.18-6.40); PS2, 3.04 (1.22-5.31). The number of patients with asynchrony index (AI) >10% was reduced by 50% with NAVA. In contrast to PS, no ineffective effort or late cycling was observed with NAVA. There was less premature cycling with NAVA (events/min): NAVA, 0.00 (0.00-0.00); PS1, 0.14 (0.00-0.41); PS2, 0.00 (0.00-0.48). More double triggering was seen with NAVA, 0.78 (0.46-2.42); PS1, 0.00 (0.00-0.04); PS2, 0.00 (0.00-0.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard PS, NAVA can improve patient-ventilator synchrony in intubated spontaneously breathing intensive care patients. Further studies should aim to determine the clinical impact of this improved synchrony.
METHODS: Prospective interventional study in spontaneously breathing patients intubated for acute respiratory failure. Three consecutive periods of ventilation were applied: (1) PS1, (2) NAVA, (3) PS2. Airway pressure, flow, and transesophageal diaphragmatic electromyography were continuously recorded.
RESULTS: All results are reported as median (interquartile range, IQR). Twenty-two patients were included, 36.4% (8/22) having obstructive pulmonary disease. NAVA reduced trigger delay (ms): NAVA, 69 (57-85); PS1, 178 (139-245); PS2, 199 (135-256). NAVA improved expiratory synchrony: inspiratory time in excess (ms): NAVA, 126 (111-136); PS1, 204 (117-345); PS2, 220 (127-366). Total asynchrony events were reduced with NAVA (events/min): NAVA, 1.21 (0.54-3.36); PS1, 3.15 (1.18-6.40); PS2, 3.04 (1.22-5.31). The number of patients with asynchrony index (AI) >10% was reduced by 50% with NAVA. In contrast to PS, no ineffective effort or late cycling was observed with NAVA. There was less premature cycling with NAVA (events/min): NAVA, 0.00 (0.00-0.00); PS1, 0.14 (0.00-0.41); PS2, 0.00 (0.00-0.48). More double triggering was seen with NAVA, 0.78 (0.46-2.42); PS1, 0.00 (0.00-0.04); PS2, 0.00 (0.00-0.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard PS, NAVA can improve patient-ventilator synchrony in intubated spontaneously breathing intensive care patients. Further studies should aim to determine the clinical impact of this improved synchrony.