Search

Rationale: It is unknown whether preventing overdistention or collapse is more important when titrating positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Objectives: To compare PEEP targeting minimal overdistention or minimal collapse or using a compromise between collapse and overdistention in a randomized trial and to assess the impact on respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, inflammation, and hemodynamics. Methods: In a porcine model of ARDS, lung collapse and overdistention were estimated using electrical impedance tomography during a decremental PEEP titration. Pigs were randomized to three groups and ventilated for 12 hours: PEEP set at ⩽3% of overdistention (low overdistention), ⩽3% of collapse (low collapse), and the crossing point of collapse and overdistention. Measurements and Main Results: Thirty-six pigs (12 per group) were included. Median (interquartile range) values of PEEP were 7 (6–8), 11 (10–11), and 15 (12–16) cm H2O in the three groups (P < 0.001). With low overdistension, 6 (50%) pigs died, whereas survival was 100% in both other groups. Cause of death was hemodynamic in nature, with high transpulmonary vascular gradient and high epinephrine requirements. Compared with the other groups, pigs surviving with low overdistension had worse respiratory mechanics and gas exchange during the entire protocol. Minimal differences existed between crossing-point and low-collapse animals in physiological parameters, but postmortem alveolar density was more homogeneous in the crossing-point group. Inflammatory markers were not significantly different. Conclusions: PEEP to minimize overdistention resulted in high mortality in an animal model of ARDS. Minimizing collapse or choosing a compromise between collapse and overdistention may result in less lung injury, with potential benefits of the compromise approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The Oxylator is an automatic resuscitator, powered only by an oxygen cylinder with no electricity required, that could be used in acute respiratory failure in situations in which standard mechanical ventilation is not available or feasible. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of mechanical ventilation by using this automatic resuscitator in an animal model of ARDS. METHODS: A randomized experimental study in a porcine ARDS model with 12 pigs randomized to the Oxylator group or the control group (6 per group) and ventilated for 4 h. In the Oxylator group, peak pressure was set at 20 cm H2O and PEEP was set at the lowest observed breathing frequency during a decremental PEEP titration. The control pigs were ventilated with a conventional ventilator by using protective settings and PEEP at the crossing point of collapse and overdistention, as indicated by electrical impedance tomography. Our end points were feasibility and safety as well as respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, and hemodynamics. RESULTS: After lung injury, the mean ± SD respiratory system compliance and PaO2 /FIO2 were 13 ± 2 mL/cm H2O and 61 ± 17 mm Hg, respectively. The mean ± SD total PEEP was 10 ± 2 cm H2O and 13 ± 2 cm H2O in the control and Oxylator groups, respectively (P = .046). The mean plateau pressure was kept to < 30 cm H2O in both groups. In the Oxylator group, the tidal volume was transiently > 8 mL/kg but was 6 ± 0.4 mL/kg at 4 h, whereas the breathing frequency increased from 38 ± 4 to 48 ± 3 breaths/min (P < .001). There was no difference in driving pressure, compliance, PaO2/FIO2, and pulmonary shunt between the groups. The mean ± SD PaCO2 was higher in the Oxylator group after 4 h, 74 ± 9 mm Hg versus 58 ± 6 mm Hg (P < .001). There were no differences in hemodynamics between the groups, including blood pressure and cardiac output. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term mechanical ventilation by using an automatic resuscitator and a fixed pressure setting in an ARDS animal model was feasible and safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Reverse triggering dyssynchrony (RT) is a patient-ventilator interaction where a respiratory muscle contraction is triggered by a passive mechanical insufflation. Its impact on diaphragm structure and function is unknown. Objectives: To establish an animal model of RT with lung injury receiving lung-protective ventilation and to assess its impact on the structure and function of the diaphragm. Methods: Lung injury was induced by surfactant depletion and high-stress ventilation in 32 ventilated pigs. Animals were allocated to receive passive mechanical ventilation (Vt: 10 ml/kg; respiratory rate [RR]: 30-35 breaths/min; n = 8) or a more lung-protective strategy (Vt: 6-8 ml/kg; n = 24) with adjustments in RR to facilitate the occurrence of RT for 3 hours. Diaphragm function (transdiaphragmatic pressure [Pdi] during phrenic nerve stimulation [force/frequency curve]) and structure (biopsies) were assessed. The impact of RT on diaphragm function was analyzed according to the breathing effort assessed by the pressure-time product. Measurements and Main Results: Compared with passive ventilation, the protective ventilation group with RT received significantly lower Vt (7 vs. 10 ml/kg) and higher RR (45 vs. 31 breaths/min). An entrainment pattern of 1:1 was the most frequently occurring in 83% of the animals. Breathing effort induced by RT was highly variable across animals. RT with the lowest tercile of breathing effort was associated with 23% higher twitch Pdi compared with passive ventilation, whereas RT with high breathing effort was associated with a 10% lower twitch Pdi and a higher proportion of abnormal muscle fibers. Conclusions: In a reproducible animal model of RT with variable levels of breathing effort and entrainment patterns, RT with high effort is associated with impaired diaphragm function, whereas RT with low effort is associated with preserved diaphragm force. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Asymmetrical lung injury is a frequent clinical presentation. Regional distribution of Vt and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) could result in hyperinflation of the less-injured lung. The validity of esophageal pressure (Pes) is unknown.Objectives: To compare, in asymmetrical lung injury, Pes with directly measured pleural pressures (Ppl) of both sides and investigate how PEEP impacts ventilation distribution and the regional driving transpulmonary pressure (inspiratory - expiratory).Methods: Fourteen mechanically ventilated pigs with lung injury were studied. One lung was blocked while the contralateral one underwent surfactant lavage and injurious ventilation. Airway pressure and Pes were measured, as was Ppl in the dorsal and ventral pleural space adjacent to each lung. Distribution of ventilation was assessed by electrical impedance tomography. PEEP was studied through decremental steps.Measurements and Results: Ventral and dorsal Ppl were similar between the injured and the noninjured lung across all PEEP levels. Dorsal Ppl and Pes were similar. The driving transpulmonary pressure was similar in the two lungs. Vt distribution between lungs was different at zero end-expiratory pressure (≈70% of Vt going in noninjured lung) owing to different respiratory system compliance (8.3 ml/cm H2O noninjured lung vs. 3.7 ml/cm H2O injured lung). PEEP at 10 cm H2O with transpulmonary pressure around zero homogenized Vt distribution opening the lungs. PEEP ≥16 cm H2O equalized distribution of Vt but with overdistension for both lungs.Conclusions: Despite asymmetrical lung injury, Ppl between injured and noninjured lungs is equalized and esophageal pressure is a reliable estimate of dorsal Ppl. Driving transpulmonary pressure is similar for both lungs. Vt distribution results from regional respiratory system compliance. Moderate PEEP homogenizes Vt distribution between lungs without generating hyperinflation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a need for innovative, inexpensive, and simple ventilator devices for mass use has emerged. The Oxylator (CPR Medical Devices, Markham, Ontario, Canada) is an FDA-approved, fist-size, portable ventilation device developed for out-of-hospital emergency ventilation. It has not been tested in conditions of severe lung injury or with added PEEP. We aimed to assess the performance and reliability of the device in simulated and experimental conditions of severe lung injury, and to derive monitoring methods to allow the delivery of safe, individualized ventilation during situations of surge. METHODS: We bench-tested the functioning of the device with an added PEEP valve extensively, mimicking adult patients with various respiratory mechanics during controlled ventilation, spontaneous breathing, and prolonged unstable conditions where mechanics or breathing effort was changed at every breath. The device was further tested on a porcine model (4 animals) after inducing lung injury, and these results were compared with conventional ventilation modes. RESULTS: The device was stable and predictable, delivering a constant flow (30 L/min) and cycling automatically at the inspiratory pressure set (minimum of 20 cm H2O) above auto-PEEP. Changes in respiratory mechanics manifested as changes in respiratory timing, allowing prediction of tidal volumes from breathing frequency. Simulating lung injury resulted in relatively low tidal volumes (330 mL with compliance of 20 mL/cm H2O). In the porcine model, arterial oxygenation, CO2, and pH were comparable to conventional modes of ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: The Oxylator is a simple device that delivered stable ventilation with tidal volumes within a clinically acceptable range in bench and porcine lung models with low compliance. External monitoring of respiratory timing is advisable, allowing tidal volume estimation and recognition of changes in respiratory mechanics. The device can be an efficient, low-cost, and practical rescue solution for providing short-term ventilatory support as a temporary bridge, but it requires a caregiver at the bedside. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which examined the consequences for acute lung injury and hypothesized that priming before injurious mechanical ventilation with a clinically relevant model of sepsis would be linked with greater expression of inflammatory mediators and a functional worsening of lung physiology. It measured the mediators associated with sepsis and lung injury in the plasma. It concluded that there is significant discordance among systemic and pulmonary mediators.

Purpose: Comparisons of negative versus positive pressure ventilation have imperfectly matched the pressure-time profile or the lung volume history, or have incompletely applied in vivo negative pressure to include the complete thoracic wall and abdomen. Hypothesis: Negative pressure exerts the same pattern of lung distension as positive pressure when the pressure-time and volume history profiles are identical and the application of negative pressure is over the whole lung. Methods: (1) In isolated (ex vivo) and (2) intact (in vivo) mouse lungs ( n = 4/group) (sealed chamber enclosing either the whole lung or whole mouse except for external airway opening), identical and inverse-tidal, square-wave pressure-time profiles were obtained with positive and negative pressure ventilation. (3) Following an identical volume history, surfactant-depleted rabbits ( n = 7) were randomly assigned to sustained, static equivalent positive versus negative pressures. (4) Surfactant-depleted anesthetized rabbits ( n = 10) with identical volume histories were randomized to positive versus negative ventilation with identical pressure-time characteristics. Results: Matched positive and negative pressure time profiles in ex vivo and in vivo mice resulted in identical tidal volumes. Identical (negative vs. positive) sustained static pressures resulted in similar PaO and end expiratory lung volumes. Positive and negative ventilation with identical volume histories and pressure time characteristics showed no difference in oxygenation or lung volumes. Historical comparisons suggested better oxygenation with negative pressure when the volume history was not identical. Conclusions: These data do not support major biological differences between negative and positive pressure ventilation when waveforms and lung volume history are matched. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]