Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010;14(2):R34.
doi: 10.1186/cc8912. Epub 2010 Mar 16.

Regional lung aeration and ventilation during pressure support and biphasic positive airway pressure ventilation in experimental lung injury

Affiliations

Regional lung aeration and ventilation during pressure support and biphasic positive airway pressure ventilation in experimental lung injury

Marcelo Gama de Abreu et al. Crit Care. 2010.

Abstract

Introduction: There is an increasing interest in biphasic positive airway pressure with spontaneous breathing (BIPAP+SBmean), which is a combination of time-cycled controlled breaths at two levels of continuous positive airway pressure (BIPAP+SBcontrolled) and non-assisted spontaneous breathing (BIPAP+SBspont), in the early phase of acute lung injury (ALI). However, pressure support ventilation (PSV) remains the most commonly used mode of assisted ventilation. To date, the effects of BIPAP+SBmean and PSV on regional lung aeration and ventilation during ALI are only poorly defined.

Methods: In 10 anesthetized juvenile pigs, ALI was induced by surfactant depletion. BIPAP+SBmean and PSV were performed in a random sequence (1 h each) at comparable mean airway pressures and minute volumes. Gas exchange, hemodynamics, and inspiratory effort were determined and dynamic computed tomography scans obtained. Aeration and ventilation were calculated in four zones along the ventral-dorsal axis at lung apex, hilum and base.

Results: Compared to PSV, BIPAP+SBmean resulted in: 1) lower mean tidal volume, comparable oxygenation and hemodynamics, and increased PaCO2 and inspiratory effort; 2) less nonaerated areas at end-expiration; 3) decreased tidal hyperaeration and re-aeration; 4) similar distributions of ventilation. During BIPAP+SBmean: i) BIPAP+SBspont had lower tidal volumes and higher rates than BIPAP+SBcontrolled; ii) BIPAP+SBspont and BIPAP+SBcontrolled had similar distributions of ventilation and aeration; iii) BIPAP+SBcontrolled resulted in increased tidal re-aeration and hyperareation, compared to PSV. BIPAP+SBspont showed an opposite pattern.

Conclusions: In this model of ALI, the reduction of tidal re-aeration and hyperaeration during BIPAP+SBmean compared to PSV is not due to decreased nonaerated areas at end-expiration or different distribution of ventilation, but to lower tidal volumes during BIPAP+SBspont. The ratio between spontaneous to controlled breaths seems to play a pivotal role in reducing tidal re-aeration and hyperaeration during BIPAP+SBmean.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distributions of hyperaerated (hyper), normally aerated (normal), poorly aerated (poorly) and nonaerated (non) compartments at end-expiration during pressure support ventilation (PSV), biphasic positive pressure ventilation + spontaneous breaths (BIPAP+SBmean), controlled (BIPAP+SBcontrolled) and spontaneous (BIPAP+SBspont) breath cycles. Calculations were performed for different lung zones from ventral to dorsal (1 = ventral, 2 = mid-ventral, 3 = mid-dorsal, and 4 = dorsal) at lungs apex, hilum, and base using dynamic computed tomography. The contributions of BIPAP+SBspont and BIPAP+SBcontrolled to BIPAP+SBmean were weighted by their respective rates (weighted mean). Bars and vertical lines represent means and standard deviations, respectively. * P < 0.05 vs. PSV; † P < 0.05 vs. BIPAP+SBcontrolled.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Distributions of hyperaerated (hyper), normally aerated (normal), poorly aerated (poorly) and nonaerated (non) compartments at end-inspiration during pressure support ventilation (PSV), biphasic positive pressure ventilation + spontaneous breaths (BIPAP+SBmean), controlled (BIPAP+SBcontrolled) and spontaneous (BIPAP+SBspont) breath cycles. Calculations were performed for different lung zones from ventral to dorsal (1 = ventral, 2 = mid-ventral, 3 = mid-dorsal, and 4 = dorsal) at lungs apex, hilum, and base using dynamic computed tomography. The contributions of BIPAP+SBspont and BIPAP+SBcontrolled to BIPAP+SBmean were weighted by their respective rates (weighted mean). Bars and vertical lines represent means and standard deviations, respectively. * P < 0.05 vs. PSV; † P < 0.05 vs. BIPAP+SBcontrolled.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Tidal reaeration during pressure support ventilation (PSV), biphasic positive pressure ventilation + spontaneous breaths (BIPAP+SBmean), controlled (BIPAP+SBcontrolled) and spontaneous (BIPAP+SBspont) breath cycles. Calculations were performed for different lung zones from ventral to dorsal (1 = ventral, 2 = mid-ventral, 3 = mid-dorsal, and 4 = dorsal) at lungs apex, hilum, and base using dynamic computed tomography. The contributions of BIPAP+SBspont and BIPAP+SBcontrolled to BIPAP+SBmean were weighted by their respective rates (weighted mean). Bars and vertical lines represent means and standard deviations, respectively. * P < 0.05 vs. PSV; † P < 0.05 vs. BIPAP+SBcontrolled.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Tidal hyperaeration during pressure support ventilation (PSV), biphasic positive pressure ventilation + spontaneous breaths (BIPAP+SBmean), controlled (BIPAP+SBcontrolled) and spontaneous (BIPAP+SBspont) breath cycles. Calculations were performed for different lung zones from ventral to dorsal (1 = ventral, 2 = mid-ventral, 3 = mid-dorsal, and 4 = dorsal) at lungs apex, hilum, and base using dynamic computed tomography. The contributions of BIPAP+SBspont and BIPAP+SBcontrolled to BIPAP+SBmean were weighted by their respective rates (weighted mean). Bars and vertical lines represent means and standard deviations, respectively. * P < 0.05 vs. PSV; † P < 0.05 vs. BIPAP+SBcontrolled.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Putensen C, Hering R, Muders T, Wrigge H. Assisted breathing is better in acute respiratory failure. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2005;11:63–68. doi: 10.1097/00075198-200502000-00010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Putensen C, Zech S, Wrigge H, Zinserling J, Stuber F, von Spiegel T, Mutz N. Long-term effects of spontaneous breathing during ventilatory support in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001;164:43–49. - PubMed
    1. Esteban A, Ferguson ND, Meade MO, Frutos-Vivar F, Apezteguia C, Brochard L, Raymondos K, Nin N, Hurtado J, Tomicic V, González M, Elizalde J, Nightingale P, Abroug F, Pelosi P, Arabi Y, Moreno R, Jibaja M, D'Empaire G, Sandi F, Matamis D, Montañez AM, Anzueto A. VENTILA Group. Evolution of mechanical ventilation in response to clinical research. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177:170–177. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200706-893OC. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Seymour CW, Frazer M, Reilly PM, Fuchs BD. Airway pressure release and biphasic intermittent positive airway pressure ventilation: Are they ready for prime time? J Trauma. 2007;62:1298–1309. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31803c562f. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Calvi E, Bigatello LM, Gattinoni L. Different modes of assisted ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure. Eur Respir J. 2002;20:925–933. doi: 10.1183/09031936.02.01552001. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types