The effects of tidal volume demand on work of breathing during simulated lung-protective ventilation
- PMID: 12162801
The effects of tidal volume demand on work of breathing during simulated lung-protective ventilation
Abstract
Background: Lung-protective ventilation (LPV) can result in a ventilator tidal volume (V(T)) below patient V(T) demand, which may elevate work of breathing (WOB). Increasing the ventilator inspiratory flow may not sufficiently reduce WOB, because the patient's flow-time requirements may exceed the ventilator's flow-time delivery pattern. We investigated (1) the effects of V(T) demand on WOB during LPV and (2) which ventilator pattern best reduced WOB while achieving LPV goals.
Methods: A standard WOB lung model simulated assisted breathing. Using 3 ventilators (Hamilton Veolar, Hamilton Galileo, and Dräger Evita 2 dura), we tested volume-control ventilation with a constant flow pattern (VCV-CF), volume-control ventilation with a decelerating flow (VCV-DF), and pressure-control ventilation (PCV). Simulated V(T) demand was increased from 50-125% of the ventilator-delivered V(T) (400 mL) as ventilator inspiratory time (T(I)) was decreased (0.95, 0.80, 0.65, and 0.45 s) relative to simulated T(I) (0.8 s). WOB was measured with a pulmonary mechanics monitor.
Results: During VCV-CF and VCV-DF, a V(T) demand of > or = 100% drastically increased WOB, attributable to imposed WOB from the inspiratory valve. Increasing inspiratory flow by using the decelerating flow pattern and/or decreasing T(I) reduced WOB, but generally not to normal levels. "Double-triggered" breaths, with excessive V(T) delivery, often occurred when ventilator T(I) was well below simulated T(I). PCV was most effective in reducing WOB, but V(T) delivery exceeded the LPV target unless T(I) was reduced.
Conclusions: Given our dual goals of reducing both WOB and V(T) during LPV, VCV-DF with relatively brief T(I) appeared to be the best option, followed by PCV with a relatively brief T(I).
Similar articles
-
Work of breathing during lung-protective ventilation in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a comparison between volume and pressure-regulated breathing modes.Respir Care. 2005 Dec;50(12):1623-31. Respir Care. 2005. PMID: 16318643 Clinical Trial.
-
The effects of pressure control versus volume control assisted ventilation on patient work of breathing in acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome.Respir Care. 2000 Sep;45(9):1085-96. Respir Care. 2000. PMID: 10980100 Clinical Trial.
-
The impact of imposed expiratory resistance in neonatal mechanical ventilation: a laboratory evaluation.Respir Care. 2008 Nov;53(11):1450-60. Respir Care. 2008. PMID: 18957147
-
Pressure-controlled versus volume-controlled ventilation: does it matter?Respir Care. 2002 Apr;47(4):416-24; discussion 424-6. Respir Care. 2002. PMID: 11929615 Review.
-
Using ventilator graphics to identify patient-ventilator asynchrony.Respir Care. 2005 Feb;50(2):202-34; discussion 232-4. Respir Care. 2005. PMID: 15691392 Review.
Cited by
-
Low-tidal-volume ventilation in the acute respiratory distress syndrome.N Engl J Med. 2007 Sep 13;357(11):1113-20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMct074213. N Engl J Med. 2007. PMID: 17855672 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Quantifying unintended exposure to high tidal volumes from breath stacking dyssynchrony in ARDS: the BREATHE criteria.Intensive Care Med. 2016 Sep;42(9):1427-36. doi: 10.1007/s00134-016-4423-3. Epub 2016 Jun 24. Intensive Care Med. 2016. PMID: 27342819 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Miscellaneous