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
. 2024 Jul 1;141(1):44-55.
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000005014.

Effects of Positive End-expiratory Pressure on Pulmonary Perfusion Distribution and Intrapulmonary Shunt during One-lung Ventilation in Pigs: A Randomized Crossover Study

Affiliations

Effects of Positive End-expiratory Pressure on Pulmonary Perfusion Distribution and Intrapulmonary Shunt during One-lung Ventilation in Pigs: A Randomized Crossover Study

Jakob Wittenstein et al. Anesthesiology. .

Abstract

Background: During one-lung ventilation (OLV), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) can improve lung aeration but might overdistend lung units and increase intrapulmonary shunt. The authors hypothesized that higher PEEP shifts pulmonary perfusion from the ventilated to the nonventilated lung, resulting in a U-shaped relationship with intrapulmonary shunt during OLV.

Methods: In nine anesthetized female pigs, a thoracotomy was performed and intravenous lipopolysaccharide infused to mimic the inflammatory response of thoracic surgery. Animals underwent OLV in supine position with PEEP of 0 cm H2O, 5 cm H2O, titrated to best respiratory system compliance, and 15 cm H2O (PEEP0, PEEP5, PEEPtitr, and PEEP15, respectively, 45 min each, Latin square sequence). Respiratory, hemodynamic, and gas exchange variables were measured. The distributions of perfusion and ventilation were determined by IV fluorescent microspheres and computed tomography, respectively.

Results: Compared to two-lung ventilation, the driving pressure increased with OLV, irrespective of the PEEP level. During OLV, cardiac output was lower at PEEP15 (5.5 ± 1.5 l/min) than PEEP0 (7.6 ± 3 l/min) and PEEP5 (7.4 ± 2.9 l/min; P = 0.004), while the intrapulmonary shunt was highest at PEEP0 (PEEP0: 48.1% ± 14.4%; PEEP5: 42.4% ± 14.8%; PEEPtitr: 37.8% ± 11.0%; PEEP15: 39.0% ± 10.7%; P = 0.027). The relative perfusion of the ventilated lung did not differ among PEEP levels (PEEP0: 65.0% ± 10.6%; PEEP5: 68.7% ± 8.7%; PEEPtitr: 68.2% ± 10.5%; PEEP15: 58.4% ± 12.8%; P = 0.096), but the centers of relative perfusion and ventilation in the ventilated lung shifted from ventral to dorsal and from cranial to caudal zones with increasing PEEP.

Conclusions: In this experimental model of thoracic surgery, higher PEEP during OLV did not shift the perfusion from the ventilated to the nonventilated lung, thus not increasing intrapulmonary shunt.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources