1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ultraprotective versus apneic ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a physiological study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Even an ultraprotective ventilation strategy in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) might induce ventilator-induced lung injury and apneic ventilation with the sole application of positive end-expiratory pressure may, therefore, be an alternative ventilation strategy. We, therefore, compared the effects of ultraprotective ventilation with apneic ventilation on oxygenation, oxygen delivery, respiratory system mechanics, hemodynamics, strain, air distribution and recruitment of the lung parenchyma in ARDS patients with ECMO.

          Methods

          In a prospective, monocentric physiological study, 24 patients with severe ARDS managed with ECMO were ventilated using ultraprotective ventilation (tidal volume 3 ml/kg of predicted body weight) with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2) of 21%, 50% and 90%. Patients were then treated with apneic ventilation with analogous FiO 2. The primary endpoint was the effect of the ventilation strategy on oxygenation and oxygen delivery. The secondary endpoints were mechanical power, stress, regional air distribution, lung recruitment and the resulting strain, evaluated by chest computed tomography, associated with the application of PEEP (apneic ventilation) and/or low V T (ultraprotective ventilation).

          Results

          Protective ventilation, compared to apneic ventilation, improved oxygenation (arterial partial pressure of oxygen, p < 0.001 with FiO 2 of 50% and 90%) and reduced cardiac output. Both ventilation strategies preserved oxygen delivery independent of the FiO 2. Protective ventilation increased driving pressure, stress, strain, mechanical power, as well as induced additional recruitment in the non-dependent lung compared to apneic ventilation.

          Conclusions

          In patients with severe ARDS managed with ECMO, ultraprotective ventilation compared to apneic ventilation improved oxygenation, but increased stress, strain, and mechanical power. Apneic ventilation might be considered as one of the options in the initial phase of ECMO treatment in severe ARDS patients to facilitate lung rest and prevent ventilator-induced lung injury.

          Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00013967). Registered 02/09/2018. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013967.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-022-00604-9.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study.

          To develop and validate a new Simplified Acute Physiology Score, the SAPS II, from a large sample of surgical and medical patients, and to provide a method to convert the score to a probability of hospital mortality. The SAPS II and the probability of hospital mortality were developed and validated using data from consecutive admissions to 137 adult medical and/or surgical intensive care units in 12 countries. The 13,152 patients were randomly divided into developmental (65%) and validation (35%) samples. Patients younger than 18 years, burn patients, coronary care patients, and cardiac surgery patients were excluded. Vital status at hospital discharge. The SAPS II includes only 17 variables: 12 physiology variables, age, type of admission (scheduled surgical, unscheduled surgical, or medical), and three underlying disease variables (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, metastatic cancer, and hematologic malignancy). Goodness-of-fit tests indicated that the model performed well in the developmental sample and validated well in an independent sample of patients (P = .883 and P = .104 in the developmental and validation samples, respectively). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 in the developmental sample and 0.86 in the validation sample. The SAPS II, based on a large international sample of patients, provides an estimate of the risk of death without having to specify a primary diagnosis. This is a starting point for future evaluation of the efficiency of intensive care units.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system.

              This paper presents the form and validation results of APACHE II, a severity of disease classification system. APACHE II uses a point score based upon initial values of 12 routine physiologic measurements, age, and previous health status to provide a general measure of severity of disease. An increasing score (range 0 to 71) was closely correlated with the subsequent risk of hospital death for 5815 intensive care admissions from 13 hospitals. This relationship was also found for many common diseases. When APACHE II scores are combined with an accurate description of disease, they can prognostically stratify acutely ill patients and assist investigators comparing the success of new or differing forms of therapy. This scoring index can be used to evaluate the use of hospital resources and compare the efficacy of intensive care in different hospitals or over time.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Tobias.Graf@umm.de
                Christoph.Boesing@umm.de
                Isabel.Brumm@umm.de
                biehler@lnm.mw.tum.de
                kei.mueller@tum.de
                manfred.thiel@umm.de
                ppelosi@hotmail.com
                prmrocco@biof.ufrj.br
                thomas.luecke@medma.uni-heidelberg.de
                Joerg.Krebs@umm.de
                Journal
                J Intensive Care
                J Intensive Care
                Journal of Intensive Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                2052-0492
                7 March 2022
                7 March 2022
                2022
                : 10
                : 12
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.411778.c, ISNI 0000 0001 2162 1728, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, , University Medical Centre Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of the University of Heidelberg, ; Theodor-Kutzer Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany
                [2 ]GRID grid.6936.a, ISNI 0000000123222966, Institute for Computational Mechanics, , Technical University Munich, ; Boltzmannstraße 15, 85748 Garching, Germany
                [3 ]Ebenbuild GmbH, Schinkelstrasse 44, 80805 Munich, Germany
                [4 ]GRID grid.5606.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2151 3065, Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, , University of Genoa, ; Viale Benedetto XV 16, Genoa, Italy
                [5 ]Anesthesiology and Critical Care, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, Genoa, Italy
                [6 ]GRID grid.8536.8, ISNI 0000 0001 2294 473X, Laboratory of Pulmonary Investigation, Carlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, , Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Centro de Ciências da Saúde, Avenida Carlos Chagas Filho, ; 373, Bloco G-014, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3037-0144
                Article
                604
                10.1186/s40560-022-00604-9
                8900404
                35256012
                e7fafeb9-e129-44a2-b44f-9ca47aded98d
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 28 September 2021
                : 27 February 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim der Universität Heidelberg (8990)
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                acute respiratory distress syndrome,ventilator-induced lung injury,respiratory mechanics,respiratory function,mechanical ventilation,extracorporeal membrane oxygenation,strain,transpulmonary pressure

                Comments

                Comment on this article